mental cruelty Archives | Page 2 of 2

Utt HC | Mental cruelty is no less than physical cruelty, wife causing mental cruelty to husband valid ground for dissolution of marriage; Court dismisses appeal

Uttaranchal High Court: A Division Bench of Ravi Malimath and Narayan Singh Dhanik, JJ., dismissed and appeal which was filed aggrieved by

Case Briefs High Courts

Del HC | Adultery can only be committed after marriage, allegation of having relationship before marriage cannot be a ground of adultery; Divorce petition dismissed

Delhi High Court: A Division Bench of Hima Kohli and Asha Menon, JJ., while addressing a matrimonial appeal filed on behalf of the

Case Briefs High Courts

Utt HC | ‘Cruelty can never be defined with exactitude and mental cruelty cannot be established by direct evidence’ Divorce granted as husband’s narration proved mental cruelty against him

Uttaranchal High Court: A Division Bench of Alok Singh and Narayan Singh Dhanik, JJ. contemplated an appeal filed against the judgment passed

Case Briefs High Courts

Utt HC | Physically assaulting husband’s mother also amounts to ‘mental cruelty’ and is a legitimate ground for divorce

Uttaranchal High Court: A Division Bench of Sudhanshu Dhulia and R.C. Khube, JJ. entertained an appeal filed against the impugned judgment and

Case Briefs High Courts

Mere severance of relation or separation without desertion not sufficient ground for divorce

Chhattisgarh High Court: An appeal filed challenging the decision of the District Judge whereby he dismissed appellant’s petition filed under Section 13

Case Briefs Supreme Court

Forcing the husband to leave his parents, who are dependent on his income, amounts to cruelty

Supreme Court: Dealing with the case where the husband had sought divorce from his wife on the ground that she was forcing

Case Briefs High Courts

Family Courts cautioned not to sit with a ‘preoccupied mind and extract reasonings from the void’ while deciding divorce cases

Karnataka High Court: Expressing concern over the insensitive approach of the Family Court, Bellary in the present case wherein it had granted