NAVEEN KOHLI versus NEELU KOHLI

Citation: [2006] 3 S.C.R. 53 · Decided: 21-03-2006 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: B.N. AGRAWAL · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 8 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

NA VEEN KOHLI 
A 
v. 
NEELU KOHLI 
MARCH 2 I, 2006 
[B.N. AGRAWAL, A.K. MATHUR AND DALVEER BHANDARI, JJ.] 
B 
Hindu Law: 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (as amended by 1976 Amendment): Sections 
JO and 13. 
C 
Irretrievable breakdown of marriage--Ground for divorce-Cruelty in 
matrimonial cases-Husband filed a petition for divorce alleging that the wife 
was a bad-tempered woman of rude behaviour-It was further alleged that 
she, in collusion with her parents, got sufficient business property transferred 
in her name and that she indulged in indecent behaviour-The wife filed D 
criminal cases against the· husband and made efforts to get him arrested 
thereby revealing her deep and intense feeling of revenge against the husband-
Wife also filed fQ[_ged complaints against the husband under Ss. 3971398 of 
the Companies Act before the Company Law Board alleging that the husband 
was a criminal, infidel, forger, alcoholic and her manager to denigrate his E 
position from the proprietor to an employee of her company-The wife also 
filed a false complaint using all kinds of abuses against the husband-The 
husband was continuously harassed by the police-The trial court found that 
the husband was mentally, physically and financially harassed and tortured 
by the wife-The trial court stated that many a time efforts had been made/or 
an amicable settlement, but there was no cordiality left between the parties F 
and there was no possibility of their living together-The trial court ordered 
cancellation of the marriage between the parties under S. I 3 and directed the 
husband to pay Rs. 5 lacs as the wife's livelihood allowance-The husband 
deposited the amount as directed but the wife did not withdraw the amount-
On appeal, the High Court set aside the trial court's judgment holding that G 
the actions of the appellant amounted to misconduct, uncondonable separately 
for the purpose of Section 13(/)(i-a)-Correctness of-Held: It is the obligation 
of the Court that the marriage status should, as far as possible, as long as 
possible and whenever possible, be maintained-But when the marriage is 
53 
H 
54 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2006] 3 S.C.R. 
A totally dead, in that event, nothing is gained by trying to keep the parties tied 
forever to a marriage which in fact has ceased to exist--ln the instant case, 
there has been total disappearance of emotional substratum in the marriage--
The wife is bent upon treating the husband with mental cruelty~lt is abundant(y 
clear that the marriage between the parties had broken down irretrievably 
and there is no chance of their coming together, or living together again-
B Hence, marriage between the parties dissolved- Incorporation of irretrievable 
breakdown of marriage as a ground for the grant of divorce recommended 
Words and Phrases: 
"Cruelty"-Meaning of-Jn the context of S. I 3 (l){i-a) of the Hindu 
C Marriage Act, 1955. 
''Irretrievable breakdown of marriage'' -Meaning of-Explained 
The appellant and the respondent are husband and wife. The 
appellant-husband filed a petition for divorce under the Hindu Marriage 
D Act, 1955 alleging that the respondent-wife was a bad-tempered woman 
of rude behaviour. It was further alleged that she, in collusion with her 
parents, got sufficient business property transferred in her name and that 
she indulged in indecent behaviours. The respondent filed criminal cases 
against the appellant and made efforts to get him arrested thereby 
revealing her deep and intense feeling of revenge against the appellant. 
E The respondent also filed a forged complaint under Sections 397/398 of 
the Companies Act, 1956 before the Company Law Board calling him a 
criminal, infidel, forger, alcoholic and her manager to denigrate his 
position from the proprietor to an employee of her company. The 
respondent also filed a false complaint using all kinds of abuses against 
F the appellant. The appellant was continuously harassed by the police. 
The trial court found that the appellant was mentally, physically and 
financially harassed and tortured by the respondent. The trial court stated 
that many a time efforts had been made for an amicable settlement, but 
there was no cordiality left between the parties and there was no possibility 
G of their living together. The trial court ordered cancellation of the 
marriage between the parties under Section 13 of the Act and directed 
the appellant to pay Rs. 5 lacs as the respondent's livelihood allowance. 
The appellant de

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.