DR. (MRS.) MALATHI RAVI, M.D. versus DR. B.V. RAVI M.D.

Citation: [2014] 6 S.C.R. 218 · Decided: 30-06-2014 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA · Disposal: Disposed off
Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2014] 6 S.C.R. 218 
DR. (MRS.) MALATHI RAVI, M.D. 
Y. 
DR. B.V. RAVI M.D. 
(Civil Appeal No. 5862 of 2014) 
JUNE 30, 2014 
[SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPAOHAYA AND 
DIPAK MISRA, JJ.] 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - s. 13(1) - D/ssolutiori of 
C marriage by way of divorce - Inference of mental cruelty- On 
facts, petition for divorce by the husband on the ground of 
desertion rejected by family court; however, the High Court 
taking note of subsequent events, granted divorce on the 
ground of mental cruelty, even though said ground was not 
D prayed in the relief clause - Interference with - Held: 
A/legation of desertion, as enshrined uls. 13(1 )(ib) not 
established - However, incidents antecedent to the filing of 
the petition reveal the attitude and the conduct of the wife 
towards.her husband - Wife did not invite husband and his 
E family members for naming ceremony of their son; wife 
pursued higher studies without informing the husband; wife 
alleged that the husband had kept her as unpaid servant; 
husband at the time of delivery went to the hospital to bring. 
the wife and child back to his house but wife along with the 
F child went to her parental house - Wife did not join husband 
immediat~ly pursuant to the order of the family court but 
joined on the last days of expiration of period; and after two 
months wife lodged an FIR against the husband and his family 
members and as a result the husband suffered day's custody 
G - It can be inferred that the husband was treated with mental 
cruelty - Husband faced ignominy being an Associate 
Professor in a Government Medical College - Wife showed. 
anaemic emotional disposition to the husband - Thus, the 
decree of divorce granted by High Court upheld singularly on 
H 
218 
DR. (MRS.) MALATHI RAVI, M.D. v. DR. B.V. RAVI 
219 
M.D. 
the ground of mental cruelty - However, in view of the social 
A 
status and strata and the conct,Jt of effective availing of 
Rs. 25, 00, 0001- to the wife, excluding the amount already paid 
- Subsequent events. · 
B 
Mental cruelty - Concept of - Effect of mental cruelty -
Held: Mental cruelty and its effect cannot be stated with 
arithmetical exactitude - It varies from individual to individual, 
from society to society and also depends on the status of the 
persons - What would be a mental cruelty in the life of two 
individuals belonging to particular strata of the society may C 
not amount to mental cruelty in respect of another couple 
belonging to a different stratum of society - Agonized feeling 
or for that matter a sense of disappointment can take place 
by certain acts causing a grievous dent at the mental level -
Inference has to be drawn from the attending circumstances. 
Subsequent events - Reliance upon - Held: Subsequent 
facts under certain circumstances can be taken into 
consideration. 
Administration of justice - Duty of the court - Dissolution 
of marriage sought on the ground of desertion by the 
husband, rejected by family court - However, High Court 
taking into consideration subsequent events, granting divorce 
D 
E 
on. the ground of mental cruelty, even though the said ground 
was not prayed - Correctness of - Held: On facts, it is the 
bounden duty of this Court to consider the issue of mental. F 
cruelty for the sake of doing complete justice - Parties should 
not be left to fight the battle afresh after expiry of thirteen years 
of litigation - Dealing with the plea of mental cruelty would not 
affect any substantive right of the wife rather would condone 
a minor technical aspect - Administration of justice provokes · · G 
the judicial conscience that it is a fit case to invoke power 
conferred on Supreme Court under Article 142 - Constitution 
of India, 19,50 - Article 142. 
The husband-respondent, an Associate Professor in 
11, 
220 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2014] 6 S.C.R. 
A Medical College filed a petition seeking decree for judicial 
separation, which was subsequently amended seeking 
dissolution of marriage by way of divorce alleging that his 
wife-appellant had deserted him. The appellant-wife in the 
same petition filed an application under section 9 of the 
B Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights. The 
Family Court dismissed the petition for divorce since the 
factum of desertion as requisite in law was not proved 
and allowed the application for restitution of conjugal 
rights. The wife did not join the husband immediately but 
c only after the husband wrote letters to her as also
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.