The Madras High Court recently observed that when a wife initiates litigation only to protect her property rights and her children's custody, the same can never be considered to be a ground for mental cruelty to the husband.
Facts of the case
The respondent had filed an application before the Additional Subordinate Court seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion but the same was dismissed by the Trial Court. Challenging the same, he approached the District Court which allowed the appeal and granted a decree of divorce to her husband on the ground of mental cruelty and desertion. Hence, the appellant approached the High Court against the said decree.
The district judge had noted that the husband had not deserted the wife rather he was forced to leave the matrimonial home and instead of taking any steps to restore the conjugal rights, the wife had initiated legal proceedings to give trouble to her husband.
Submission on behalf of petitioner
On the other hand, the wife had argued that the immovable property was purchased out of her earnings, and the building was also put up using a loan obtained by her and thus her husband had no right over the property. She further contended that the allegations of adultery were completely false. She also claimed that her husband had contracted a second marriage and had been having an adulterous life since 2001 and had deserted her and their minor son without providing any maintenance.
Submission on behalf of Respondent
The respondent contended that he had purchased an immovable property in the name of his wife out of love and affection and constructed a building after obtaining a loan. He submitted that she, claiming rights over the property, filed a suit for injunction and as a counterblast, he filed a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction. Though his suit was dismissed, on appeal, it was partly allowed.
He also submitted that she had initiated proceedings seeking guardianship of their minor son. He further informed the court that though she had also lodged a complaint alleging that he had claimed dowry, the same was dismissed.
Courts Observation
The Court said that when the husband had left the matrimonial home and he is residing away and there is an allegation of second marriage on the husband, the wife cannot be blamed for not taking steps to restore the conjugal rights. It added that the First Appellate Court was not right in placing the blame upon the wife for not filing any application for restitution of conjugal rights after arriving at a finding that the husband has miserably failed to prove the allegation of adultery.
The bench further observed that the divorce petition filed by the husband lacked pleadings concerning mental cruelty, desertion, and also the deposition of the husband relating to the said allegation did not support his case.
The Court observed, "Mere living away from one of the parties to the marriage is not desertion if it is accompanied by a reasonable cause and if it is without consent or against the wish of such party. It includes wilful neglect of the petitioner by the other party to the marriage."
The court observed, “It is clear that the parties to the marriage are living apart only due to the property dispute which is pending S.A(MD). No.1068 of 2007. Some attempts made by this Court to settle the issue were not fruitful. … All the substantial questions of law are answered in favor of the appellant”.
Judgment
Accordingly, the Court allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment of the First Appellate Court.
Case Title: Chandra v. Selvaraj
Citation: C.M.S.A(MD)No.15 of 2011
Coram: Justice R Vijayakumar
For the Appellant: Mr.E.R.Kumaresan
For the Respondent: Mr.A.N.Ramanathan For Mr.M.Bindran
Picture Source :
