Nilesha vs Bhushan Bhimrao Deshmukh

V.A. Naik, J—By these Family Court Appeals, the appellant - wife challenges the common judgment of the Family Court, Akola dated 16.09.2014, allowing the petition filed by the respondent -husband for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty and dismissing the petition filed by the appellant -wife for restitution of conjugal rights.

The appellant and the respondent (hereinafter will be referred to as wife and husband respectively for the sake of convenience), were married at Akola on 13.03.2011, according to the Hindu rites and customs. At the relevant time, the wife was working as a Teacher in Manora, District -Washim and the husband was working with Jalgaon Peoples Cooperative Bank, Jalgaon. It is the case of the husband in the petition filed by him for divorce that since the inception of marriage, the wife was not behaving properly with the husband and his parents. It is pleaded that the wife behaved well in the matrimonial house only for a period of 5 to 6 days and thereafter started quarreling with the husband and his family members on petty matters relating to cooking, sweeping etc. It is pleaded that the wife did not want to perform the household duties as she was in service. It is pleaded that the wife always threatened the husband and his family members that she will commit suicide and falsely implicate the husband and his parents. It is pleaded that the wife used to lose her temper without any just and reasonable cause and used to remain out of the house for sometime. It is pleaded that initially the parents of the husband did not take cognizance of the behaviour of the wife but subsequently they realized that the wife was treating them with cruelty, by giving them false threats of committing suicide. It is pleaded that the wife used to throw the meals, tear her saree, damage her mobile in rage. It is pleaded that the wife used to rise very late in the morning at about 8.30 AM and even thereafter she used to lie for 1 1/2 hours in the bed till about 10.00 O'' clock on the pretext that she had back pain. It is pleaded that the wife used to threaten the husband on several occasions when the husband tried to ask her to mend her ways. It is pleaded that the wife avoided to stay with the husband and his family members in Diwali and abused the husband in filthy language. It is pleaded that the wife went to reside with her parents during the summer vacation of 2012 and did not join the company of the husband at Jalgaon. It is pleaded that despite the best efforts, the wife declined to mend her ways and, therefore, the husband was constrained to file the petition. It is pleaded that the wife had checked the purse of the sister of the husband and had blamed her for stealing some clothes. It is pleaded that the wife had lodged a false complaint against the husband and his family members in Police Station, Jalgaon, but no offence was registered against the husband and his family members. On the aforesaid pleadings, the husband sought a decree of divorce.

The wife filed the written statement and denied the claim of the husband. The pleadings of the wife in the petition filed by her for restitution of conjugal rights and her pleadings in the written statement are almost identical. The wife pleaded that her family members had spent a lot for the marriage and paid a sum of Rs. Three lakh to the husband. It is pleaded that the husband and his family members had decided to place the wife under their thumb since the inception of the marriage. It is pleaded that the husband and his family members desired that the wife should do the pooja, cook food, wash clothes, sweep and clean the utensils. It is pleaded that the in-laws believed that a daughter-in-law should always give a glass of water, break-fast and other items to the in-laws, as soon as they demanded it. It is pleaded that the wife was treated very badly by the husband and her in-laws. It is pleaded that the wife was beaten up by the husband with fists and with this, the parents of the husband used to be pleased and happy. It is pleaded that the parents of the husband desired that their son should get remarried and hence the wife was treated with cruelty. It is pleaded that the husband and his family members tried their level best to ensure that the marriage between the parties was unsuccessful. It is pleaded that the wife went to the matrimonial home on 07.01.2013 to fetch some important documents but her in-laws did not allow her to enter in the house and threw the clothes and articles belonging to the wife from the balcony of the house. It is pleaded that since January 2012, the parties are not residing together and the husband has left the company of wife without any just and reasonable cause. The wife sought a decree for restitution of conjugal rights and the dismissal of the petition for a decree of divorce.

The husband examined himself and also examined his father to prove his case. The wife examined herself and examined the wife of her brother and the husband of her sister. On an appreciation of the evidence on record, the Family Court by the judgment dated 16.09.2014, allowed the petition filed by the husband for a decree of divorce and dismissed the petition filed by the wife for restitution of conjugal rights. The judgment of the Family Court is challenged by the wife in these appeals.

Shri Dangre, the learned counsel for the appellant -wife submitted that the Family Court was not justified in allowing the petition filed by the husband for a decree of divorce. It is stated that there was nothing serious between the husband and wife and the petition was filed by the husband at the instigation of his parents. It is submitted that at the instance of the parents of the husband, the husband expected that the wife should do all the work in the matrimonial home and merely because according to the husband she had declined to do the work, a decree of divorce cannot be passed. It is submitted that the Family Court has granted a decree of divorce mainly on the basis of the SMSs allegedly sent by the wife to the husband during the pendency of the petition. It is submitted that the SMSs were produced on record by the husband after the parties had examined the witnesses. It is submitted that the SMSs could not have been exhibited by taking recourse to Section 14 of the Family Courts Act. It is submitted that the husband ought to have led formal evidence for proving the SMSs and it was necessary for the Family Court to grant an opportunity to the wife to rebut the SMSs. It is stated that the Family Court had first exhibited the SMSs and then permitted the parties to raise their objection to the SMSs at the time of arguments. It is submitted that the action on the part of the Family Court, in accepting the SMSs on record, is clearly illegal and since the decree of divorce is mainly based on the contents of the SMSs, that are not proved, the same is liable to be set aside.

Shri Mohta, the learned counsel for the respondent -husband supported the judgment of the Family Court and submitted that the Family Court has not allowed the petition filed by the husband only on the basis of the SMSs and the other evidence tendered by the husband was considered. It is submitted that the husband had been successful in proving that the wife was treating him with cruelty. It is submitted that the wife used to threaten the husband that she would commit suicide and implicate the husband and his family members in false cases. It is submitted that the wife had not only misbehaved with the husband but also with his family members including his sister, who had come to the matrimonial home for delivery. It is stated that the wife had branded her sister-in-law as a thief by checking her purse. It is submitted that these facts have been rightly considered by the Family Court while granting a decree of divorce. It is submitted that the Family Court has rightly considered the evidence tendered by the husband in the form of SMSs as the SMSs were sent by the wife to the husband during the pendency of the petition. It is submitted that the Family Court had rightly exhibited the SMSs by taking recourse to Section 14 of the Family Courts Act, specially when the wife had admitted that the wife was sending the SMSs to the husband during the pendency of the petition and she had also visited his work place during the pendency of the proceedings. It is submitted that the contents of the SMSs were rightly considered by the Family Court while holding that the wife had treated the husband with cruelty. The learned counsel sought for the dismissal of the appeals.

On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on a perusal of the records and proceedings, it appears that the following points arise for determination in these appeals :

Whether the husband proves that his wife has treated him with cruelty?

Whether the wife proves that the husband has left her company without any just and reasonable cause?

Whether the husband is entitled to a decree of divorce and/ or whether the wife is entitled to a decree of restitution of conjugal rights ?

What order ?

To answer the aforesaid points, it would be necessary to consider the pleadings of the parties and the evidence tendered by them. We have elaborately stated the pleadings in the earlier part of the judgment and it would not be necessary to reiterate the pleadings at this stage again. The husband had clearly pleaded and also stated in his evidence that the wife had treated him with cruelty. The husband had stated that though the husband expected the wife to be obedient and submissive, the wife was arrogant and declined to do the household work on the ground that she was in service. It is stated by the husband in his evidence that at times the wife refused to reside at Jalgaon in the matrimonial home and used to reside at Manor, the place where she was serving, despite holidays. It is stated by the husband that the wife refused to discharge the marital obligations. It is stated that the wife misbehaved with the husband and her in-laws and disrespected them. It is pleaded that the wife used to threaten the husband and his family members that she would commit suicide and involve them in false criminal cases. It is pleaded that when the sister of the husband viz., Asmita came to reside with the husband and his parents in the matrimonial home, the wife checked her purse and blamed her for stealing clothes. It is pleaded and also stated by the husband in his evidence that on 08.01.2013, the wife came to his bank and abused him. The Family Court rightly considered the evidence of the husband and his father to hold that the husband had been successful in proving the aforesaid facts. The Family Court found that the wife had gone to the matrimonial home on 07.01.2013 and tried to make a show that the husband and his Family members threw her articles from the balcony. While considering the allegation of the wife that her articles were thrown from the balcony, the Family Court found that the wife had admitted in her cross examination that there was no balcony to the house of the husband. The Family Court held that if there was no balcony in the house of the husband, the case of the wife that the parents and sisters of the husband threw the articles from the balcony was false and baseless. The Family Court found that the husband had been successful in proving that the wife threatened the husband and his family members and behaved arrogantly. The Family Court found that the wife abused the husband at the work place. According to the Family Court, the said acts on the part of the wife caused mental harassment to the husband. The Family Court also relied on the SMSs by which the wife had cursed the husband and his family members. All the SMSs are quoted in the judgment of the Family Court. In some of the SMSs, the wife has stated that after her death, the husband would be blamed for her death and he would be put behind the bars for a period of ten years. The wife has stated that if the husband remarries, the ladies to whom he has remarries, would die and he would never get a child. The wife stated in the SMS that the husband was not a human being but a demon. The wife cursed that something very bad and inauspicious would happen to the husband everyday. It is stated in the SMSs that the God will punish the husband and his family members. It is stated in the SMS that the sister of the husband would lead an unhappy life. The message of 19.06.2014 states that the wife was standing outside his bank and if he refuses to accept the letter which she brought along with her, she would give the letter to any employee of the Bank and the same would be made public. It is stated in the SMSs dated 19.06.2014 that if the husband would treat the wife well, he would be happy otherwise ill fortune would befall on the husband. There are other curses and abuses in the other SMSs that are quoted in the judgment of the Family Court. The wife could not have sent the SMSs to the husband during the pendency of the proceedings, specially after the parties had tendered the evidence, oral and documentary. The Family Court rightly accepted the said SMSs tendered by the husband on record by taking recourse to the provisions of Section 14 of the Family Courts Act. We do not find anything wrong in the action of the Family Court of exhibiting the SMSs specially when the husband had clearly stated in the application for temporary injunction that the wife had sent the SMSs to the husband and the wife had admitted that she had sent the SMSs to the husband, in her reply dated 23.05.2014 and her application dated 04.07.2014. The wife had filed an application stating therein that the husband was unnecessarily using the SMSs and their contents as a weapon to seek a decree of divorce. The wife admitted in the reply dated 23.05.2014 that she had sent the SMSs to the husband. We also find from the communication / application of the wife dated 04.07.2014 that the wife had gone to the work place of the husband to meet him and had sent the SMS to the husband with a view to change his mind. She admitted in the said application that she would not send any SMS to the husband henceforth. The clear admissions of the wife in the reply dated 23.05.2014 and the application dated 04.07.2014 go a long way in showing that the wife had admitted that she has sent the SMSs to the husband during the pendency of the petition. Also, we find that the counsel for the appellant -wife had admitted at the time of arguments that the wife had indeed sent the SMSs but the condition of the mind of the wife should be considered and a serious note of the SMSs should not be taken. It is apparent from the perusal of the record and also from the submissions of the counsel for the wife in the Family Court that the wife had indeed sent the SMSs to the husband during the pendency of the petition. In view of the clear admission by the wife in respect of sending the SMSs, the Family Court cannot be faulted for exhibiting the SMSs. In the circumstances of the case, we do not find that the Family Court has committed any illegality in accepting the SMSs on record. Also, it is necessary to note that the Family Court had not granted decree of divorce only on the basis of the SMSs and the same is granted on the basis of the other facts proved by the husband as also the SMSs. The Family Court has found on a proper appreciation of the material on record that the wife was treating the husband with cruelty as she always threatened the husband and his family members and levelled false and baseless allegations against them. The Family Court found that the wife had levelled a false and baseless allegation in respect of the theft of a petticoat on the sister of the husband. It was also found by the Family Court that the wife had levelled false allegations against the husband and his family members in respect of throwing her articles from the balcony when there was no balcony in the house of the husband. Also, it is proved by the husband that the wife went to his work place and abused him and his relatives. The act on the part of the wife to go to the work place of the husband and create a scene and abuse him and his family members would surely prove the cruelty by the wife. The contents of the SMSs also show that the wife was trying to threaten the husband that she would implicate him and his family members in false cases and that he would be put behind the bars for her death. The approach of the Family Court in deciding the petition was just and proper and the judgment of the Family Court is not liable to be set aside. We find that the wife had treated the husband with cruelty and the husband was entitled to a decree of divorce. Consequently, it is necessary to hold that the wife had not been successful in proving that the husband deserted her without any just and reasonable cause.

In the result, both the Family Court Appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs.