Source: Delhi High Court

Why in News?

Recently, the Delhi High Court in the matter of X. v. Y. has held that a wife's request for financial support from her husband cannot be termed as an act of cruelty.

What was the Background of X. v. Y. Case?

• In this case, the appellant (husband) and the respondent (wife) got married on 11^th February 2010.
• The differences started emerging, as according to the respondent the expectations of dowry and consequent demands from the appellant’s family, started emerging.
• The husband alleged that the wife used to abuse him physically and financially and that because of her adamant conduct, all his efforts to make the marriage work had gone in vain.
• The husband filed a divorce petition under the provisions of Section 13 (1) (i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA) before the Family Court which was later dismissed by the Court.
• Thereafter, the present appeal has been filed before the Delhi High Court under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984.
• The appeal was allowed by the High Court.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• A division bench of Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Neena Bansal Krishna observed that vindictiveness, vexation and intolerance are the foes of coherent comprehension. Though the aggrieved person is entitled and well within their rights to avail the remedy under laws, but, crossing the point of “no return” becomes inevitable once the spouses get engulfed in this rabbit hole of criminal litigations. The bullets of unjustified accusations and complaints cause such fatal wounds, leading to unendurable mental and physical acrimony, making it impossible for the spouses to live together.
• It was further held that a wife's request for financial support from her husband cannot be termed as an act of cruelty but there was other overwhelming evidence on record to prove the cruelty by the respondent towards the appellant.

What are the Relevant Legal Provisions Involved in it?

Section 13 (1) (i-a) of HMA

About:

• This section deals with cruelty as a ground for divorce.
• Prior to the 1976 amendment in the HMA, cruelty was not a ground for claiming divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act.
• It was only a ground for claiming judicial separation under Section 10 of the Act.
• By the 1976 Amendment, the Cruelty was made ground for divorce.
• The word cruelty has not been defined in this Act.
• Generally, cruelty is any behavior which causes a physical or mental, intentional or unintentional.

Types of Cruelty:

• According to the law laid down by the Supreme Court in several judgments, there are two types of cruelty.
  • Physical Cruelty - violent conduct causing pain to the spouse.
  • Mental cruelty – spouse is inflicted with any kind of mental stress or has to constantly go through mental agony.

Case Laws:

• In Shobha Rani v. Madhukar Reddi (1988) the Supreme Court held that the word cruelty can have no fixed definition.
• In Mayadevi v. Jagdish Prasad (2007), the Supreme Court held that any kind of mental cruelty faced by either of the spouses not just the woman, but men as well can apply for a divorce on grounds of cruelty.

Family Courts Act, 1984

• This Act was enacted for the purpose of establishing Family Courts with a view to promote conciliation, and to secure speedy settlement of, disputes relating to marriage and family affairs.
• Section 19 of this Act deals with appeals.