In this significant judgement, the Supreme Court observed that a marriage characterized by an increasingly bitter and acrimonious relationship, where both parties inflict cruelty upon each other, essentially degrades the institution of marriage. The Court opined that such a situation, wherein the marriage has irretrievably broken down, warrants the dissolution of the union on the grounds of cruelty.   This case is particularly noteworthy as it recognizes that cruelty may be m

In Sarita Sharma v. Sushil Sharma , the petitioner husband had filed for divorce in U.S. courts . During the ongoing custody proceedings, where both parties had been appointed as managing conservators  of their children, the wife brought the children to India, allegedly without informing the husband. The husband alleged that the children were in illegal custody  of the wife, and the High Court initially directed Sarita Sharma to restore custody of the two children  to him and

In Vikas Aggarwal v. Anubha  (AIR 2002 SC 1796), the Supreme Court of India  dealt with an appeal filed by an NRI husband  whose defence had been struck off in a maintenance suit filed by his wife in the Delhi High Court. Despite repeated directions and multiple opportunities, the husband failed to personally appear before the Court, as ordered. The High Court had specifically required his personal appearance to clarify how a US court granted him a divorce decree  even though

In a divorce case, the Division Bench of B.R. Gavai, CJ., and Augustine George Masih*, J., deemed it fit to invoke the power under Article 142 of the Constitution and dissolved the marriage between the parties and directed the wife, an IPS Officer, and her parents to tender unconditional apology to the husband and his family members for physical and mental trauma caused to them due to cases filed by the wife, which led to the husband and his father languishing in jail for 109

This case set an important precedent regarding cruelty as a ground for divorce. The wife filed false criminal complaints against the husband and his family, leading to their harassment. The Supreme Court held that filing false cases constitutes mental cruelty, sufficient for granting divorce. It underscored the misuse of legal provisions and the need for judicial intervention in such matters. This case further delineated the threshold for establishing cruelty. The Court empha

In this judgment, the Supreme Court ruled that making  false allegations  of extramarital affairs or criminal conduct amounts to mental cruelty and is valid ground for divorce.   The Court stressed that marriage should be built on trust, and baseless accusations can severely damage the relationship beyond repair.

This case further clarified the concept of cruelty, emphasising that it must be assessed based on the cumulative conduct of the parties and its impact on the petitioner. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision to grant a divorce based on the wife's behaviour, which constituted both physical and mental cruelty. This case is significant in reaffirming the broad interpretation of cruelty and its impact on individual well-being in matrimonial disputes.

This case provided comprehensive guidelines on mental cruelty as a ground for divorce. The Supreme Court held that persistent neglect, humiliation, and creating an unbearable environment could constitute mental cruelty. The judgment emphasised that mental cruelty is a state of mind and that courts must consider the cumulative effect of the conduct and its impact on the aggrieved spouse. This case is crucial in providing a nuanced understanding of mental cruelty and its impact

The wife's behaviour in the case of S. Hanumath Rao vs. S. Ramani (1999) was not cordial at her matrimonial home and towards her husband. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in this case held that mental cruelty means when either party to a marriage causes mental pain, suffering or distress to such an extent that it severs the bond between the husband and wife and, as a result, it becomes impossible to live together.