Introduction:

In the case titled Smt. Monika Tamrakar v. Prashant Kumar Tamrakar, FA(MAT) No. 10 of 2019, the Chhattisgarh High Court upheld the Family Court’s decree granting divorce to a husband on the grounds of cruelty and desertion. The marriage, solemnized in 2009, produced a son, but marital discord arose due to persistent conflicts over living arrangements with the husband’s parents.

Arguments:

The appellant wife allegedly demanded that the husband separate from his parents and live exclusively with her, creating a hostile environment and resorting to verbal abuse, including referring to the husband as a “Paaltoo Chooha” (pet rat) for obeying his parents. The husband sought divorce after the wife deserted him and their son, returning to her parental home and refusing to reconcile. In defense, the wife claimed that she had been emotionally and financially neglected, denied misbehavior towards in-laws, and argued that her efforts towards reconciliation were ignored by the Family Court.

Judgement:

The Chhattisgarh High Court, through a Division Bench comprising Justices Rajani Dubey and Amitendra Kishore Prasad, affirmed the Family Court’s decision. The Court observed that the oral testimonies of the husband and his family, along with documentary evidence of coercion and verbal castigation, satisfied the legal definition of cruelty. Admissions made by the appellant in cross-examination, including acknowledgment of desertion, further corroborated the husband’s claim. The bench specifically noted a text message sent by the wife stating, “if you leave your parents and stay with me, respond; otherwise don’t ask,” highlighting the conditional demand as evidence of mental cruelty in the context of Indian joint family norms. The Court concluded that the husband had successfully demonstrated both cruelty and desertion, while the wife failed to substantiate her claims for Restitution of Conjugal Rights. The Court also noted that the appellant had remained away from the matrimonial home for more than two years, barring a brief period for a reconciliation meeting, satisfying the statutory requirement under Section 13(1)(ib) for desertion. While upholding the divorce, the Court directed the husband to pay Rs. 5,00,000 as alimony, considering the welfare of their 12-year-old son. The judgment illustrates the judicial approach to balancing evidence of cruelty, desertion, and the rights and responsibilities of both spouses, emphasizing the significance of preserving marital integrity, while ensuring the child’s best interests are protected and appropriate maintenance is provided. The ruling also underscores the recognition of verbal abuse, coercion, and persistent attempts to alienate a spouse from their family as legally valid grounds for divorce under Indian matrimonial law.