Case Analysis - Muskan Jain

1st YEAR LLB 2023-2026 – SEMESTER 1 (2023)
1ST INTERNAL ASSESSMENT

FAMILY LAW
TOPIC – CASE ANALYSIS OF A CASE

UNDER
HINDU MARRIAGE ACT ,1955
Name – Muskan Jain

Course – LLB (H.)
PRN No. – 23010122003
Batch – 2023 -2026
CASE NAME RAJ TALREJA V. KAVITA TALREJA
Court Before the Supreme Court of India
Bench A.K.Goel, Deepak Gupta, JJ.
Counsel for Appellant Mr. Gaurav Agrawal
Counsel for Respondent Ms. Vibha Datta Makhija
Date of Judgment 24.04.2017
ABOUT THE CASE:

In this case, the wife brought false claims against the husband. The court
determined that this qualifies as mental cruelty for the spouse and is a reason
for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act by relying on precedents. In this
specific case, the court has extensively addressed the idea of mental cruelty.
The rulings of the trial court and the Supreme Court have both been overturned
by the Honourable Supreme Court.
FACTS OF THE CASE:
● The Parties involved in the appeal got married in 1989 according to Hindu Rites.
● The Husband and the Wife lived with the parents of the husband until the year 1999
and in the year 1999, the couple shifted to their own residence.
● On 19.03.2000, the husband left the matrimonial home and thereafter, on 25.03. 2000,
he filed a petition for grant of a decree of divorce.

● Subsequently, on 07.11.2000, certain news items appeared in the Newspapers in
which serious allegations were made against the husband which were published on the
intimation given by the wife.
● On 04.12.2000, the wife filed a complaint to the State Women Commission making
serious allegations against the Husband. Thereafter, she also sent similar letters to the
Chief Justice of the High Court and the Superintendent of Police and a complaint was
made to the Chief Minister.
● On 16.03.2001, the complaints were found to be false. Thereafter, on 12.04.2001, a
FIR was filed against the appellant husband under Sections 452, 323 and 341 of the
Indian Penal Code. This report was challenged after 11 years
● After an investigation, the police reached the conclusion that there was no merit in the
FIR and that the wife had filed a false FIR.
● In view of the aforesaid, the Husband moved an amendment application in the divorce
petition incorporating the above-mentioned facts and alleging that he had been
subjected to cruelty by the wife due the filing of false complaints.
● The Trial Judge dismissed the divorce petition and the appeal filed by the husband
were also dismissed. Hence, this appeal.
ISSUE OF THE CASE:
Whether a decree of divorce can be granted on the basis of cruelty?
RULE OF LAW, UNDER HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 19551
1. SECTION 13(1) (i-a) - DIVORCE

2. SECTION 24 – PERMANENT ALLIMONY AND MAINTAINCE
ANALYSIS OF THE ISSUE
In this case the wife made reckless, defamatory, and false accusations against her husband,
his family members, and colleagues, thereby lowering his reputation in the eyes of his peers,
1 HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955
the Court held that mere filing of complaints is not cruelty if there are justifiable reasons for
filing the complaints. Such allegations of the wife's cruelty may not be considered as such
under the terms of the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 simply because no action is taken on the
complaint or the accused is found not guilty after a trial. But if it turns out that the charges are
proven false, there can be no doubt that the previous act of a spouse raising false accusations
against the other spouse would be a violation of the law.
“It was recommended that the criminal proceedings be initiated against her under Section 182
of the Indian Penal Code. It is not disputed that till 16.03.2001, such criminal proceedings
were initiated against the wife.”2 Quoted from the judgment of Deepak Gupta, J.
The illustrative example of mental cruelty noted in Samar Ghosh v. Jaya Ghosh,3 2007 (4)
SCC 511 “Making false indecent defamatory derogatory allegations against the spouse or his
family, peer, relatives including issuing notices or news articles or filing complaints may
have adverse impact on their personal life as well as professional life not only this but filing
repeated false complaints and cases in the court against the spouse would in fact amount to
causing mental cruelty to the other spouse.”
They added a few more to it. In Ravi Kumar v. Julmidevi 4, this Court while dealing with the
definition of cruelty held as follows: Silence can also amount to cruelty and many more
aspects like absence of mutual respect and understanding which affects the relationship
negatively and lead to outbursts of anger or violence.
However, given that the wife later filed another complaint alleging that her husband, along
with some other people, had trespassed into her house and assaulted her, and that the police
discovered, after an investigation, that not only was the complaint false, but the injuries were
self-inflicted by the wife, the Court held that, while the wife's actions in filing false
complaints against the husband amount to cruelty, the Court is not oblivious to the
requisition.
The woman needs a nice place to live, and because her son and daughter-in-law might not
remain with her indefinitely, some sort of permanent arrangement for her alimony and home
must be arranged. This is something that the Court is aware of. According to the
circumstances of the case, the wife continues to live in the house that belonged to the
2 Raj Talreja v. Kavita Talreja , 2013 SCC OnLine Raj 944 : AIR 2013 Raj 148
3 Samar Ghosh v. Jaya Ghosh , 2007 (4) SCC 511
4 Ravi Kumar v. Julmidevi, (2010) 4 SCC 476 : (2010) 2 SCC (Civ) 185
husband's mother, whilst the husband resides in a different house with his parents, and the
parties' son and daughter-in-law live with the wife. The son is working with the father.
Therefore, the husband was ordered by the bench of A.K. Goel and Deepak Gupta, JJ, to pay
the wife Rs. 50,000 as a one-time permanent alimony within three months, and she was told
not to make any future claims for money. The Court further ordered that the wife continue to
live in the house owned by the husband's mother until the husband provided her with a
comparable size and location flat. For this reason, the husband must see to it that a flat worth
up to Rs. 1,000,000 is transferred into his wife's name.
JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT:
1) The Court allowed the appeal and the Judgments of the High Court and the Family
Court was set aside. The petition for divorce filed by the husband under Section 13 of
the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 was decreed and the marriage of the parties solemnised
on 13.04.1989 was dissolved by a decree of divorce. Further, the Court held that the
wife would be entitled to a permanent alimony of Rs. 50, 00, 000/- and a residential
flat of the value of up to Rs. 1, 00, 00, 000.
2) The Court opined that it was more than obvious that the allegations made by the wife
were false. The Court made a reference to Para 16 of K.Srinivas Rao v. D.A. Deepa
5
wherein the Supreme Court had held that making unfounded indecent defamatory
allegations against the spouse or his or her relatives in the pleadings, filing of
complaints or issuing notices or news items which may have adverse impact on the
business prospect or the job of the spouse and filing repeated false complaints and
cases in Courts against the spouse would amount to causing mental cruelty to the
other spouse.
3) The Court held that Cruelty could never be defined with exactitude and cruelty would
depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. It was observed that in the instant
case, the wife made reckless, defamatory and false accusations against the husband,
his family members and colleagues and these allegations were patently false. This
would amount to an act of cruelty.
5 K.Srinivas Rao v. D.A. Deepa , CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1794 OF 2013

4) The Court disagreed with the findings of the High Court and the Family Court and
they held that the High Court and the Family Court had decided based on observations
which were not supported by any reliable or cogent evidence on record
CONCLUSION
The law of land specially when it comes to marriage needs to be balanced equally towards
both the sexes in today’s times. Having read a bit about the Indian matrimonial laws it seems
they are heavily bent towards the fairer sex. This may be attributed to the patriarchal set up of
Indian society where women were supposed to be heavily dependent on men for everything.
However, laws and legislation should be revisited and modified according to the needs of
time and changes in the societal setup

Case Analysis - Muskan Jain

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case Analysis - Muskan Jain

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case Analysis - Muskan Jain

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1st YEAR LLB 2023-2026 – SEMESTER 1 (2023)

1ST INTERNAL ASSESSMENT

TOPIC – CASE ANALYSIS OF A CASE

Name – Muskan Jain

Court Before the Supreme Court of India

Bench A.K.Goel, Deepak Gupta, JJ.

Counsel for Appellant Mr. Gaurav Agrawal

Counsel for Respondent Ms. Vibha Datta Makhija

Date of Judgment 24.04.2017

ABOUT THE CASE:

FACTS OF THE CASE:

he filed a petition for grant of a decree of divorce.

● On 16.03.2001, the complaints were found to be false. Thereafter, on 12.04.2001, a

FIR and that the wife had filed a false FIR.

were also dismissed. Hence, this appeal.

ISSUE OF THE CASE:

Whether a decree of divorce can be granted on the basis of cruelty?

RULE OF LAW, UNDER HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 19551

1. SECTION 13(1) (i-a) - DIVORCE

ANALYSIS OF THE ISSUE

JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT:

5 K.Srinivas Rao v. D.A. Deepa , CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1794 OF 2013

You might also like