Madhya Pradesh High Court: In an appeal seeking to set aside the Family Court, order refusing to award decree of divorce, a division bench of Suresh Kumar Kait,* CJ. and Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, J., set aside the judgment and decree passed by the Family Court and granted decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion. The Court held that
“…forcing the wife to leave the job and live as per his wish and style, amounts to cruelty.”
In the instant matter, the appellant-wife sought a decree of divorce between herself and the respondent-husband. The wife filed an appeal against the judgment and decree dated 17-08-2022 passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Indore and asserted that the trial court had erred both in law and fact by not passing the decree of divorce
The appellant argued that she was not served notice of the petition filed under Section 9 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by the respondent and had no knowledge of it until after filing her divorce petition. The appellant further contended that the respondent treated her with cruelty, compelling her to leave her job and live with him, despite the fact that she was employed with a government job in Indore. She argued that this amounted to cruelty, and living separately to maintain her job should not be considered desertion. The appellant contended that the trial court had failed to appreciate the evidence, including the clear pleadings, and the facts that she was forced to live separately due to the respondent’s behavior.
The Court noted that the Family Court stated that the appellant did not file a complaint regarding cruelty with the police, no other witnesses were presented to support the claim of cruelty and the appellant expressed a desire for mutual divorce, as shown in her legal notice. It was noted that the Family Court held that small quarrels did not amount to cruelty and since Section 9 petition filed by the respondent is still pending, it indicates that the respondent intended to live with the appellant. The Family Court further stated that desertion is not proved since the appellant had lived separately since 2017 due to her job in Indore.
The Court noted that the appellant was appointed as Assistant Manager in LIC Housing Finance Limited and at time the respondent was doing nothing. The Court noted that this was the reason why respondent compelled the appellant to leave the job and stay with him and “till he gets the job, appellant should not do any job.”
The Court noted that the appellant had valid reasons for living separately due to her job, which is not voluntary desertion but a necessity arising out of her professional life. The Court asserted that “neither husband nor wife can force other side not to do job or do any job as per the choice of the spouse.” The Court held that the respondent’s compulsion for the appellant to leave her job and stay with him amounts to cruelty.
The Court also stated that “the respondent-husband never wanted that appellant should get divorce, this itself amounts to cruelty.” The Court asserted that the trial court did not adequately consider the appellant’s version of events, particularly her testimony regarding the respondent’s conduct and the coercion she faced from the respondent regarding her employment.
The Court allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment and decree passed by the Family Court. The Court dissolved the marriage between the appellant and the respondent, solemnized on 19-04-2014, by a decree of divorce.
[Poonam v. Naveen, 2024 SCC OnLine MP 7375, Decided on 13-11-2024]
*Judgment by Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Shri Raghvendra Singh Raghuvanshi, Counsel for the Appellant