Chandigarh: Destroy a request for a man who wants to divorce his wife with a cruelty reasons by accusing that he has to sleep outside his house because he does not open the door by returning from the late office, Punjab and Haryana High Court holding ‘trivial problems cannot be considered atrocities.
HC also believes that “bad behavior must be persistent for a fairly long period.” The man also accused his wife used to make false accusations about him and equate this with character murder.
The division bench, which consisted of justice, Bahri and Justice Karamjit Singh who was thrown by an appeal filed by a man who challenged the order on December 24, 2013, where his divorce application was against his wife by reason of atrocities and desers under the part 13 of the Hindu marriage the action was dismissed .
“Examples of cruelty must be established by referring to the date, time, place and how it occurs …
we have the view that the general allegations of atrocities without determining the date or month of such incidents are not any assistance to the applicant to prove the case,” Bench Division said.
Divorce petition: spouse life separately due to differences of opinion, the applicant has been married in May 2005 with a ceremony and Hindu ceremony and has a son with his wife in November 2007.
However, because of differences of opinion and other problems, spouse life separate since November 2009.
Male’s request Who looked for the dissolution of marriage by reason of atrocities was rejected by the family court in Hisar.
Harmed by the command of the family court, the man approached HC.
In his appeal, the Petitioner argued that his wife first embarrassed him by refusing to open the door late at night and made him wait outside until morning.
He argues that his wife is used to treating and humiliating him and family members in front of his relatives, friends and colleagues.
“He used against wild accusations against the applicant that he was a woman and drunkard and thus caused mental torture to him,” the person argues.
The man argued that in a divorce petition, his wife took the defense that he was a drunkard and cruel and at the same time he showed his willingness to live with him in the petition for the restitution of conjugal rights under section 9 of Hindu marriage laws.
He argued that his wife could not blow hot and cold at the same time.
The man’s advice also argued that the couple lived separately for about 12 years and there was no possibility of their reconciliation.
The advice representing the applicant’s wife, however, argued that she was forced to leave the Matrimonial house in November 2009 and in just the next two months, the applicant submitted a divorce petition, without making every effort to settle friendly disputes.
He argued that the applicant had never been looking for his son’s prisoner who lived with him for the past 12 years.
That the behavior of the people mentioned above showed that he was interested in getting rid of it by leveling false accusations against him.
After hearing the two parties, HC rejected the man’s request to observe that a bald statement from the applicant was not enough to prove the land of atrocities.
In men’s dispute that divorce decisions can be given on the grounds that their marriage is damaged, the benches refer to the Supreme Court who holds that irreparable marriage solving is not land for divorce under Hindu marriage law.