NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court, while upholding a couple's divorce on the grounds of cruelty by the wife, has observed that a wife should not be a constant reminder of one’s financial limitations and one must tread carefully between the needs, wants, and desires.
"A wife should not be a constant reminder of one’s financial limitations. Pressurizing spouse to fulfil distant and whimsical dreams clearly not within his financial reach may create a sense of persistent dissatisfaction which would be sufficient mental strain to drain the contentment and tranquility out of any married life. One must tread carefully between the needs, wants and desires," a division bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna noted in the order.
The appellant woman had approached the high court against a family court order granting her divorce from her husband on the grounds of cruelty by her and for no restitution of conjugal rights for one year after the passing of the decree.
The couple got married in 1995 and had one son from their wedlock. The marriage survived till 2005 for about eight years before the parties separated.
The bench pointed out that respondent/husband's testimony with respect to the conduct of the appellant impacting his office work to such an extent that he often got reprimanded by his superior officers, her physically assaulting of the child, the incident of shredding their marriage photographs, her disrespectful attitude towards her sister in law, taunting the husband for his financial constraints, have not been rebutted by the appellant, during the recording of the evidence.
Referring to a Supreme Court Verdict, the bench held that it can be easily inferred that the acts of indifference, non-accommodative nature, constant taunts on the husband’s financial capacity, disrupting family relations and an extremely disrespectful attitude, is per se a conduct that would cause disquiet in the mind of the respondent.
"Thus, such constant bickering and fights caused continuous stress in the mind of the respondent and impacted his mental well-being as well," the order read.
Various incidents narrated by the respondent towards the overall conduct and a non-adjusting attitude of the appellant who lacked maturity to even sort out the differences with the husband, leads to the irresistible conclusion that such conduct was bound to cause a grave apprehension in the mind of the respondent disrupting his mental equilibrium.
Though these incidents may seem to be innocuous, insignificant or trifling when considered independently, but when such conduct prevails over a period of time, it is bound to create mental stress of the kind, which makes it impossible for the parties to survive in their matrimonial relationship, the court said while upholding the divorce granted by the family court on grounds of cruelty by the wife.