Hindu Marriage Act,
1955 (25 of 1955) S. 13 - A panchayati divorce does not override the provisions of the Act as a marriage may only be dissolved under the provisions of the Act - First marriage was subsisting
on the date of her marriage - The marriage between the respondent and the appellant is null and void. (182) P.L.R.
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (25 of 1955) S. 13 - A party in a divorce petition can appear
through a power of attorney specially when he has relationship with one of the parties to the lis and the party which has given a power of attorney is abroad. (175) P.L.R.
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (25 of 1955) S. 13 - Adulterer has not been impleaded as a
respondent - Petitioner/husband moved an application for permission to examine doctor by issuing a commission to prove DNA report - As per Section 112 of the Evidence Act, 1872 a child born
within the continuance of a valid marriage, shall be treated as a conclusive proof of the legitimacy of the said child v.by examining the doctor as a witness wants to establish DNA report to the effect that he was not
the father of the child born to the respondent - However, in view of Sections 4 and 112 of the Act, the learned trial court had rightly dismissed the application - Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of
1872) S. 4, 112 - Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908) Order 26 Rule 4. (175) P.L.R.
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (25 of 1955) S. 13 - Cruelty - For the dissolution thereof,
petty quibbles and trifling differences and general wear and tear in the family should not be annexed with much importance - Such incidents are required to be weighed from that point of view
for determining what constitutes `cruelty' in each particular case - In her affidavit when appeared in the witness box that the respondent and his family members raised a demand of cash
amount to the tune of Rs.2 lacs but such a figure does not find mention in her petition preferred under Section 9 of the Act - Lodging of complaint under Sections 406, 498-A read with section
34 of IPC, and summoning of the respondent/husband and his parents are also admitted facts - Demand of dowry or cash amount to the tune of Rs.2 lacs does not arise after more than eight years
of the marriage from his wife or her parents especially in the circumstances that even as per the averments made in the petition under Section 9 of the Act only a sum of Rs.1.5 lac was
incurred at the time ofmarriage - Decree for dissolution of marriage is affirmed/upheld on the ground of mental cruelty.
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (25 of 1955) S. 13 - Desertion - For desertion for the purpose
of seeking divorce under the Act would mean intentionally and permanently forsaking and abandonment of one spouse by the other without that of other's consent and without reasonable cause -
It is not simply withdrawal from a place, but it has to be withdrawal from a state of things - In other words, it would be a total repudiation of obligation of marriage i.e. not permitting or
allowing cohabitation between the parties continuously for a period of two years prior to the filing of the divorcepetition - Held desertion not proved. (173) P.L.R.
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (25 of 1955) S. 13 -
Divorce - Actual reason for the dispute is discord between the families - The appellant and the respondent may be victims of their family feud but this fact, even if true, cannot be a ground
to infer cruelty or desertion by or at the behest of the respondent. (182) P.L.R.
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (25 of 1955) S. 13 -
Divorce - Respondent (wife), a doctor by profession, told her husband about his genetic make-up as she perceived that the husband was trying to hide some information when the child was
examined by a psychologist and inquiry was made by him if there was any family history - As the respondent was not persistent in her accusation and got an impression in good faith that the
husband was trying to hide something from the doctor(s) and thus told the husband that the child has suffered due to genetic make-up of his family - Cannot constitute a ground for divorce.
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (25 of 1955) S. 13 - How a second petition for divorce was
maintainable when the first one filed by him on the same ground stood dismissed and he filed no appeal against the decree. (174) P.L.R.
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (25 of 1955) S. 13 - Relief of divorce granted by the trial
Court on the ground that the marriage had emotionally and practically dead, we find that the trial Court had gone beyond the scope of Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Only on the
grounds set out in Section 13 or under Section 13-B of the Act, the Court can grant the relief of divorce - "Irretrievable break down of marriage" was not one of the grounds adumbrated under
Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act - It is only the Hon'ble Supreme Court which can, in exercise of its extra ordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, grant divorce
on the ground that the marriage had broken down irretrievably - Constitution of India, Article 142.(177) P.L.R.
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (25 of 1955) S. 13 - Void marriage - Ground of mental disorder
since the very inception of the marriage could have been agitated by the appellant-husband in seeking declaration of his marriage to be void within one year of date of knowledge of such
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (25 of 1955) S. 13 - Wife issued a legal notice to her husband
and family members in which she had herself mentioned that it had become impossible for her to live in her matrimonial home - She, at that time, little realised that there would be a petition
for divorce against her and the document Ex.PD could be used against her - Present respondent and his family members having remained in custody on the complaint of the wife, were subjected to
cruelty - The husband in such circumstances was entitled to a decree of divorce. (174) P.L.R.
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (25 of 1955) S. 13 - Wifes application for divorce dismissed -
Appeal - Failure of husband to pay maintenance and other expenses - The defence of the respondent-husband is liable to be struck down - The allegations of the appellant regarding cruelty are
to be accepted and accordingly, she is liable to be held entitled to a decree of divorce.(176) P.L.R.
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (25 of 1955) S. 13- Allegations in the criminal case and in the present case, are identical - Findings recorded by a criminal court are
not binding on a civil court but the judgment acquitting the respondent and his mother is relevant and does tend to fortify findings recorded by the trial court that these allegations
havebeen proved. (182) P.L.R.
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (25 of 1955) S. 13, 24 - Adultery -
Ground of adultery proved before the trial court and the said finding being maintained by the High Court on appeal, would be on different pedestal and material factor for denying the right
available under Section 24 of the Act to the erring spouse in the appeal filed under Section 28 of the Act. (178) P.L.R.