RAMCHANDER versus ANANTA

Citation: [2015] 2 S.C.R. 255 · Decided: 24-02-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: VIKRAMAJIT SEN · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2015] 2 S.C.R. 255 
RAMCHANDER 
V. 
ANANTA 
(CivilAppeal No 3483 of2011) 
FEBRUARY 24, 2015 
[VIKRAMAJIT SEN AND C. NAGAPPAN, JJ.] 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - ss.13(1 )(i-a) and 13(1 )(i-b) 
A 
B 
- Petition for divorce - By husband - On the grounds of 
mental cruelty and desertion - Decree of divorce granted by 
trial court - Decree set aside by High Court - On appeal, C 
held: The alleged conduct of the wife is not so grave and 
weighty amounting to mental cruelty, but can be said only a 
wear and tear of married life - The ground of desertion also 
is not established in view of the evidence of three witnesses, 
who had seen the couple together as spouses even after the D 
alleged date of desertion - The marriage also cannot be said 
to have irretrievably broken down - Decree of divorce rightly 
set aside. 
Words and Phrases- 'Cruelty' - Meaning of- Explained, 
E 
in the context of s. 13(1 )(i-a) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 The expression 'cruelty' has not been 
defined in the Hindu Marriage Act. Cruelty for the F 
purpose of Section 13(1 )(i-a) of the Act is to be taken as 
a behaviour by one spouse towards the other, which 
causes a reasonable apprehension in the mind of the 
latter that it is not safe for him or her to continue the 
matrimonial relationship with the other. Cruelty can be G 
physical or mental. In the present case, what is alleged 
is mental cruelty and it is necessarily a matter of 
255 
H 
256 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2015] 2 S.C.R. 
A inference to be drawn from the facts and circumstances 
of the case. It is settled law that the instances of cruelty 
are not to be taken in isolation but to take the cumulative 
effect of the facts and circumstances emerging from the 
evidence on record and then draw a fair inference 
B whether the plaintiff has been subjected to mental cruelty 
due to conduct of the other spouse. [Para 1 O] [260-D-G] 
c 
D 
E 
Samar Ghosh Vs. Jaya Ghosh 2007 (4) SCR 428 = 
(2007) 4 sec 511 - referred to. 
1.2 In the present case, the conduct of the wife that 
had been complained of appears to be not so grave 
and weighty that it can be treated to be more serious 
than ordinary wear and tear of married life. [Para 15] 
[262-F-G] 
Parveen Mehta Vs. lnderjit Mehta (2002) 5 SCC 706; A. 
Jayachandra Vs. Aneel Kaur 2004 (6) Suppl. SCR 599 = 
(2005) 2 SCC 22; and K.Srinivas Rao Vs. D.A. Deepa 2013 
(2) SCR 126 = (2013) 5 SCC 226 - referred to. 
2. The ground of desertion alleged is also not 
established. The child was only 7 years old in 2003 and 
his testimony in this regard will not advance the case of 
the plaintiff. DWs 2 to 4 have testified that they had seen 
F the plaintiff and the defendant together as spouses even 
during 2005. There is no denial against such contention 
in cross examination. There is no reason for them to 
falsely depose against the plaintiff. The trial court has 
not indicated as to how their testimonies were not found 
G reliable and the High Court has concluded that it does 
not find their evidence unworthy of credence. [Para 16] 
[262-G-H; 263-A-C] 
3. It also cannot be said that the marriage between 
the plaintiff and defendant has irretrievably broken down. 
H [Para 17] [263-D] 
RAMCHANDER v. ANANTA 
Case Law Reference 
(2002) s sec 106 
referred to 
para 7 
2004 (6) Suppl. SCR 599 
referred to 
para 7 
2013 (2) SCR 126 
referred to 
para 7 
2007 (4) SCR 428 
referred to 
para 10 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 
3483 of 2011 
From the Judgment and Order dated 24.11.2008 of the 
High Court at Calcutta Circuit Bench at Port Blair in First Civil 
Appeal No. 3 of 2008 
R. Chandrachud for the Appellant. 
Bhakti Vardhan Singh, R. C. Kohli for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
257 
A 
B 
c 
D 
C. NAGAPPAN, J. 1. The appellant-husband in this civil 
appeal has assailed the judgment dated 24.11.2008 passed 
E 
by the High Court of Calcutta Circuit Bench at Port Blair in F.A. 
No.003 of2008, wherein the Division Bench of the High Court 
set aside the decree of divorce dated 14.7.2008 granted by 
the District Judge, A & N Islands, to the appellant herein, in 
Matrimonial Suit No.27 of2005. 
F 
2. Shorn of unnecessary details the facts in brief which 
give rise to the appeal herein are as follows: The appellant-
husband is an engineer and the respondent-wife is a 
draftsman, both working in the office of Andaman Public Works G 
Department and their marriage took place on 2nct

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