Chhattisgarh High Court: In a case wherein, the appeal was filed against the judgment passed by the Family Court, Raigarh, by which the application filed by the wife seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty was dismissed, the Division Bench of Goutam Bhaduri* and Sanjay S. Agrawal, JJ., opined that the wife (petitioner) was entitled for a decree of divorce and accordingly held that the marriage dated 02-02-2006 was dissolved and the wife was entitled to Rs. 15,000 per month from the husband (respondent) towards the maintenance.
Background
In the instant case, the petitioner and the respondent got married on 02-02-2006 and out of such marriage, one son and one daughter were born.
The wife stated that because of the excessive drinking of liquor, the husband used to beat her and sell the entire household goods. The wife further stated that the daily needs of the family and the fees of school children were met by her brother. The husband was not doing anything and because of the habit of excessive drinking, the condition of the entire family deteriorated and when the husband was advised to work, he used to beat his wife. The wife also stated that on 26-05-2016, she was assaulted and abused by the husband and as such she was forced to live along with her two children at her parental home.
Thereafter, the wife stated that she filed an application to seek divorce but during such proceeding the husband promised that he would leave the drinking habit and would mend his behaviour. Thus, the petitioner withdrew the petition.
However, after the petition was withdrawn, the husband’s behaviour aggravated and when the wife demanded educational fees of the children, the husband refused to pay and instead assaulted and abused her. Subsequently, the incident was reported to the police and after preliminary enquiry, the parties arrived at a settlement and the petitioner was staying at her parental home till the respondent mend his way. Since, the situation did not improve, the petitioner eventually filed the divorce application for the second time.
The Court dismissed the divorce application filed by the petitioner and thus, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Court.
Analysis, Law, and Decision
The Court took note of the allegations made by the wife, the police report filed by her and relied on Samar Ghosh v. Jaya Ghosh, (2007) 4 SCC 511, and opined that the statements made by the wife showed that many allegations of cruelty arose because of the excessive drinking habits of the husband.
The Court noted that the respondent was ex-parte before the Family Court and despite service of the notice, the husband had not made any representation before the present Court. The Court stated that no cross-examination was conducted and in the absence of any cross examination, the allegations made by the wife would deem to be accepted. The Court further stated that, the respondent being the father could not avoid his responsibilities towards his children, especially when the wife was not working.
The Court further opined that the husband instead of discharging his obligation indulged himself in excessive drinking habit, which deteriorated the family condition, and thus, it naturally led to mental cruelty against the wife and the entire family including children.
The Court opined that the judgment passed by the Family Court could not be allowed to sustain and relying on Samar Ghosh v. Jaya Ghosh, (2007) 4 SCC 511, the Court opined that, since wife was able to prove the mental cruelty by the husband, she was entitled for a decree of divorce. Accordingly, the Court held that the marriage dated 02-02-2006 was dissolved.
The Court opined that the concept of maintenance grant was to ensure that the wife and the children of the husband were not left in a state of destitution after the divorce. Further, since no alimony was fixed by the Family Court and the wife had no source of income, the Court held that the wife was entitled to Rs. 15,000 per month from the husband towards the maintenance.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned judgment.
[Payal Sharma v. Umesh Sharma, 2023 SCC OnLine Chh 3107, decided on 26-07-2023]
*Judgment by- Justice Goutam Bhaduri
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the appellant: Barun Kumar Chakrabarty, Advocate;
