Father Boycotting Daughter's Wedding Caused Mental Anguish To Mother, Constitutes Cruelty: Madras High Court Upholds Divorce
The Madras High Court has held that a father's decision to boycott his daughter's marriage and refusal to participate in the necessary rituals could cause considerable mental anguish to the mother, constituting a form of cruelty. While dismissing the husband's appeal against the Family Court's order dissolving his marriage on grounds of cruelty and desertion, the division bench of Justice G....
The Madras High Court has held that a father's decision to boycott his daughter's marriage and refusal to participate in the necessary rituals could cause considerable mental anguish to the mother, constituting a form of cruelty.
While dismissing the husband's appeal against the Family Court's order dissolving his marriage on grounds of cruelty and desertion, the division bench of Justice G. R. Swaminathan and Justice MD Sumathi observed,
"The respondent had alleged that when their daughter was given in marriage, the appellant herein did not come forward to attend the necessary rituals. No doubt, the boycott of the marriage function by the father would definitely have caused considerable mental anguish to the mother. This would no doubt qualify as a form of cruelty".
The couple had married on November 22, 1990, according to Hindu rituals and customs, and had two children. The parties had been living separately since 2016 and had not cohabited since 2014.
The wife had approached the Family Court in 2019 seeking dissolution of the marriage on the grounds of cruelty and desertion. The family court allowed her petition on December 2, 2021, following which the husband filed the present appeal.
The bench noted that the marriage had taken place nearly 29 years before the wife instituted the divorce proceedings. The wife had also alleged that after the death of her husband's brother, he had initiated an illicit relationship with his brother's widow.
However, the court declined to discuss the adultery allegations as the widow was not made a party respondent.
The court noted that the conduct of the father has a serious emotional impact on the mother. The bench, however, also noted that the prolonged breakdown of marriage was itself significant.
"When there is no cohabitation since 2014 and the parties are remaining separate since 2016, this itself in our view would constitute cruelty to both the parties," it said and dismissed the appeal.
Case Title: V JM v J V, C.M.A.(MD)No.124 of 2022
For Husband: Advocate S.Louis
For Wife: Advocate S. Anand Chandrasekar