2006 (3) TMI 780 - SC - Indian Laws

Supreme Court grants divorce citing cruelty, orders maintenance payment.

Naveen Kohli Versus Neelu Kohli

The Supreme Court dissolved the marriage, citing cruelty by the respondent, including false allegations and legal harassment as grounds for divorce. The ... - Issues Involved:1. Cruelty as a ground for divorce.2. False allegations and their impact.3. Irretrievable breakdown of marriage.4. Maintenance and financial settlements.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Cruelty as a Ground for Divorce:The appellant filed for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, citing cruelty by the respondent. The Family Court found that the respondent had filed numerous criminal cases against the appellant, causing mental, physical, and financial harassment. The High Court, however, dismissed the divorce decree, stating the evidence was not properly evaluated. The Supreme Court emphasized that cruelty in matrimonial matters includes both physical and mental cruelty and does not necessarily require physical violence. The Court cited several precedents, including *N.G. Dastane v. S. Dastane* and *Shoba Rani v. Madhukar Reddi*, to underline that continuous ill-treatment, false allegations, and legal harassment constitute cruelty.2. False Allegations and Their Impact:The respondent accused the appellant of immoral behavior and living with another woman, 'Shivanagi,' while the appellant alleged the respondent's indecent behavior with Biswas Rout. Both parties failed to prove these allegations. The Supreme Court highlighted the impact of false allegations, referencing *V. Bhagat v. D. Bhagat*, where mental cruelty was defined as conduct causing mental pain and suffering, making it impossible for the parties to live together.3. Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage:The Supreme Court noted that the parties had been living separately for over ten years and had filed numerous cases against each other, indicating an irretrievable breakdown of marriage. The Court discussed the concept extensively, referencing the 71st Report of the Law Commission of India and various judgments, including *Sandhya Rani v. Kalyanram Narayanan* and *Chandrakala Menon v. Vipin Menon*. The Court recommended that the legislature consider including irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.4. Maintenance and Financial Settlements:The Family Court directed the appellant to pay Rs. 5 lakhs as permanent maintenance, which he deposited. The Supreme Court, considering the financial standing of the appellant, directed him to pay an additional Rs. 20 lakhs, making a total of Rs. 25 lakhs towards permanent maintenance. This amount includes the Rs. 5 lakhs already deposited. The Court emphasized that this financial settlement was in the interest of justice and to ensure a fair resolution.Conclusion:The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment and dissolved the marriage, directing the appellant to pay Rs. 25 lakhs as permanent maintenance. The Court also recommended legislative amendments to include irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a ground for divorce. The appeal was disposed of with both parties bearing their own costs.