CHENNAI: Observing that giving a false complaint against the other spouse and subjecting to a criminal trial amounts to cruelty, the Madras High Court upheld a decree passed by a family court in Dharmapuri in 2015 dissolving a marriage.
The division bench of Justice VM Velumani and Justice S Sounthar made the ruling on dismissing a civil miscellaneous appeal filed by a woman who challenged the decree passed by the family court dissolving her marriage with a man. The judges passed the orders on two grounds.
Firstly, the woman had filed a false complaint against her husband and family members. Secondly, for not living in the matrimonial house and failing to extend the conjugal bliss.
“It has been consistently held that when a false complaint is given by one of the spouses amounts to mental cruelty. The ratios in the three judgments relied on by the counsel appearing for the respondent/husband are squarely applicable to the facts of the present case, ” Justice Velumani who penned the order held.
The respondent's advocate submitted that the complaints lodged by the appellant against her husband have resulted in acquittal. " Giving false complaints and making the respondent and others undergo a criminal trial which resulted in acquittal amounts to cruelty to the respondent and his family members, " the advocate submitted.
He further pointed out three judgments in the case of Rani Narasimha Sastry Vs. Rani Suneela Rani in Supreme Court, Meenakshi Vs. Premkumar Nachiappan and Vivek Thambuswamy Vs. Maria @ Sijo Paul in the Madras HC ruling that filing false complaints would amount to mental cruelty which is against the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
The respondent submitted that the appellant married him in 1992 and since May 2004 she is not living in the matrimonial house and alleged that it is subject to the desertion under Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
The two children of the couple also stated that their mother was not living in the matrimonial house since 2004. The respondent/husband showed the family card in which the appellant’s name was not printed.
Though the woman claimed that she was living in the same house with her husband, one of the respondent side witnesses gave a contradictory statement before the judge.
“The appellant in her proof affidavit gave her address as though she was residing in the matrimonial house, while she was not residing there. During the cross-examination, the appellant accepted that she has been living in a separate house for the last one year. She has not produced the lease deed or any other document to prove that she is living there only for the past one year. The appellant has not approached the Court with clean hands, ” the judge held and confirmed the family court’s order.