/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/24709236/windows11filexplorer.jpg "Modern Windows 11 File Explorer UI and RGB lighting controls target testers")
PRAYAGRAJ: Refusing to have sex with one’s spouse for an extended period without justifiable reason was tantamount to mental cruelty, Allahabad HC recently observed while dissolving a couple’s marriage.
Varanasi resident Ravindra Pratap Yadav he had filed an appeal against a family court order dismissing his petition for divorce on November 28, 2005. He had filed for divorce for mental cruelty inflicted by his wife by refusing to cohabit and fulfill the obligations of marital life.
In its May 16 order, a divisional court consisting of Justices Suneet Kumar and Justice Rajendra Kumar noted that the family court took a hyper-technical approach and dismissed the plaintiff’s statement despite the fact that there was nothing on record to contradict the evidence presented. for him.
“Since there is no acceptable view on which a spouse can be forced to resume life with the consort, there is nothing to be gained by trying to keep the parties together in a marriage,” the court said.
According to the petitioner, the couple got married in May 1979 and after a while, his wife’s behavior changed and she refused to live with him. Later, she began to live in her parents’ house. After six months of marriage, he tried to convince his wife to come back, but she refused. In July 1994, a panchayat was held in the village and the parties reached an agreement and divorced by mutual consent. The petitioner claimed that he paid alimony of Rs 22,000 to his wife.
However, when the husband filed for a divorce decree on the grounds of mental cruelty, desertion, and divorce settlement, she did not appear in court. Proceeding ex parte, the chief judge of the Varanasi family court dismissed her husband’s petition for divorce.
Varanasi resident Ravindra Pratap Yadav he had filed an appeal against a family court order dismissing his petition for divorce on November 28, 2005. He had filed for divorce for mental cruelty inflicted by his wife by refusing to cohabit and fulfill the obligations of marital life.
In its May 16 order, a divisional court consisting of Justices Suneet Kumar and Justice Rajendra Kumar noted that the family court took a hyper-technical approach and dismissed the plaintiff’s statement despite the fact that there was nothing on record to contradict the evidence presented. for him.
“Since there is no acceptable view on which a spouse can be forced to resume life with the consort, there is nothing to be gained by trying to keep the parties together in a marriage,” the court said.
According to the petitioner, the couple got married in May 1979 and after a while, his wife’s behavior changed and she refused to live with him. Later, she began to live in her parents’ house. After six months of marriage, he tried to convince his wife to come back, but she refused. In July 1994, a panchayat was held in the village and the parties reached an agreement and divorced by mutual consent. The petitioner claimed that he paid alimony of Rs 22,000 to his wife.
However, when the husband filed for a divorce decree on the grounds of mental cruelty, desertion, and divorce settlement, she did not appear in court. Proceeding ex parte, the chief judge of the Varanasi family court dismissed her husband’s petition for divorce.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23986647/acastro_STK086_02.jpg "Tesla leak reportedly shows thousands of full self-driving safety complaints")
