Karnataka High Court.
Credit: DH Photo
Bengaluru: The High Court of Karnataka dismissed an appeal filed by a man seeking divorce on cruelty grounds, observing that "marriage is not a child's play".
The man moved the high court challenging the family court order in Bengaluru, which dismissed his petition stating his wife proved he and his mother were frustrated for not getting much dowry or property from her.
The couple — the husband working in USA and the wife in Singapore — met through a matrimonial website and got married in August 2015. They lived together for 10 days.
In 2016, the husband filed a petition for divorce under Section 13(1) (i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, citing cruelty. On January 10, 2020, the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, dismissed his petition.
In his appeal, the husband contended that after living together for 10 days, the wife left for Singapore and refused to join him in USA. All conciliation efforts failed.
The wife argued that the mother-in-law's intervention prevented her from leading a marital life or joining her husband in the US, despite her intention to do so. She submitted that the husband neither made arrangements nor applied to authorities to get a visa for her to join him in the US.
After perusing the cross-examination before the family court, the division bench said it was not established during marriage talks about an agreement that she would resign from her job and join the husband in the US after marriage.
"…it is evident that the petitioner (husband) was in need of an obedient and sincere maid rather than a wife. He appears to be expecting too much from his life partner that she should do each and every act in tune with his whims and fancies. Even to wear gold ornaments, she had to seek his permission. It appears, in view of his dominating mentality, she was unable to lead a happy marital life," the bench said.
The court further said: "Marriage is not a child's play. In matrimonial life, both husband and wife have to compromise and adjust with each other, so as to lead a normal marital life.
"In the present case, due to the petitioner's unwillingness to compromise or adjust, he was unable to continue the marital relationship with the respondent. The learned trial judge has discussed the evidence in detail and has rightly arrived at the conclusion.
"Moreover, as already stated above, even a plain reading of the petition reveals that the petitioner raised trivial issues, which could have been resolved through mutual discussion and understanding. However, neither the petitioner nor his family members made any effort to do so.
"On the contrary, the petitioner chose to blame his wife for these minor issues and alleged that he was subjected to cruelty, seeking divorce on that ground. However, he was unable to prove the same before the trial court and therefore, the trial court rightly dismissed the petition filed for the divorce."