LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

& And

AIR All India Reporter

Art. Article

DLT Delhi Law Times

Ed. Edition

et al et alia

etc. et cetera

i.e. id est

Ors. Others

p. Page

pp. Pages

para Paragraph

RPC Reports of Patent, Design and Trademarks

Cases
Sec. Section

SC Supreme Court

SCC Supreme Court Cases

SCR Supreme Court Reporter

Supp. Supplement

v. Versus
 TABLE OF CASES

S.NO. NAME OF THE CASE CITATION

1. Wright v. wright (1948) 77 CLR 191, 210

2. Blyth v. Blyth (1966) 1 AII ER 534, 536

3. Moonushee Bazloon Ruheem v. 11 MIA 551

Shumsoonissa Begum
4. Horton v. Horton (1940) p. 187

5. Gollins v. Gollins (1963) 2 AII ER 966, 970

6. Kaslefsky v. Kaslefsky (1950) 2 AII ER 398, 403

7. Beard v. Beard (1945) 2 AII ER 306.

8. Cooper v. Cooper (1950) WN 200 (HL)

9. Mrs. Flora v. Suproti Bose AIR 2011 Del.5

10. Jialal Abrol v. Sarla Devi AIR 1978 J&K 69

11. Fromhold v. Fromhold (1952) 1 TLR 1522 at p. 1527

12. Stuart v. Stuart AIR 1926 Cal 864

13.

14.
 STATEMENT OF FACTS

BACKGROUND
The appellant is Narayan Ganesh Dastane, a well educated and qualified person who
involved various projects like Colombo Plan Scheme. He obtained his doctorate in
irrigation research from an Australian University and returned to India in 1955. His
father is solicitor-com lawyer practicing in poona.

The respondent, Sucheta, comes from Nagpur but she spent her formative years mostly
in Dhelhi. She passed her B.Sc. from the Delhi university in 1954. Her father is secretary
in the commerce ministry of Government of India.

MARITAL ARRANGEMENT
In April, 1956 the respondent’s parents arranged her marriage with the appellant.
But before finishing the marriage proposal, the respondent’s father Abhyankar who
informed “as she was affected by the attack of sunstroke which affected her mental
condition for some time” to the appellant’s father by letter. In the second letter which
followed at an interval of two days, "cerebral malaria" was mentioned as an additional
reason of the mental affectation. The letters stated that she was cured at Yeravada
Mental Hospital. The appellant and his father made no enquiries with the Yeravada
Mantal Hospital.

The marriage was solemnized at poona on May 13, 1956. The appellant was then 27
and the respondent 21 years of age.
 MARITAL RELATIONSHIP
On November 1, 1956 the appellant was transferred to Poona where they are lived
together till 1958. During this period named subha was born to them on March 11,
1957 and the second daughter Vibha was born On March21, 1959. They were returned
from Poona to Delhi in August, 1959.

In January, 1961, the respondent went to poona to attend the appellant’s brother
marriage. A fortnight after the marriage, On February27, 1961 the appellant who had
also gone to poona to examine the respondent by Dr.seth, a Psychiatrist in charge of
the yaravada mental hospital. Either she herself or both she and the appellant decided
to stay for some time with the relatives for the purpose of respondent’s medical check
up. She had promised to see Dr.seth but she denies that she made any such promise.
She believed that the appellant was building up a case that she was unsound mind and
she was being lured to walk into the trap. February, 1961 was the last that they lived
together. But at the time of leaving together she was pregnant about three months. On
July18, 1961 the respondent wrote a letter to the appellant admitting that within the
bearing of visitor she had beaten the daughter Subha severely. The third child, again
girl named Pratibha was born on August19, 1961 when her parents were in the midst
of crisis.

THE ANNULMENT OF MARRIAGE

On February 19, 1962, the appellant asked for annulment of his marriage by a decree
of nullity under section-12 sub-class-1(c) of The Hindu marriage Act 1955, on the
ground that his consent was obtained by fraud for his marriage. Alternatively, he
asked for divorce under section 13 (1) (iii) on the ground that the respondent incurably
of unsound mind for the continuous period of not less than three years immediately
preceding the presentation of the petition. Alternatively, the appellant asked for
judicial separation under section 10(1) on the ground that the respondent had treated
with such cruelty as to cause reasonable apprehension his mind that.
 ISSUES RAISED

1. WHETHER THE MARRIAGE WILL GET VALIDITY UNDER HINDU

MARRIAGE ACT 1955?

2. WHETHER THE BURDEN OF PROOF OF CRUELTY LIES ON THE

PETITIONER OR NOT?

3. WHETHER THE FACT HAVE TO BE ESTABLISHED BEYOND THE

REASONABLE DOUBT IN MATRIMONIAL MATTERS?

4. WHETHER THE ACT OF SEXUAL INTERCOURSE AMOUNTS TO

CONDONATION OF CRUELTY?
 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

1. WHETHER THE MARRIAGE WILL GET VALIDITY UNDER HINDU

MARRIAGE ACT 1955?

It is humbly submitted before this hon’ble court that the petition, the respondent was
treated at yeravada mental hospital for schizophrenia but the respondent’s father
fraudulently represented that she was treated for sun-stroke and ceberal malaria. The
Hindu Marriage Act 1955, under section 12 (1) (c) on the ground that his consent was
obtained by fraud. Under section 13 (1) (III) on the ground that the respondent was
incurably unsound mind for a continuous period not less than three years. the respondent
treated him such cruelty as to cause reasonable apprehension to the appellant mind.

2. WHETHER THE BURDEN OF PROOF OF CRUELTY LIES ON THE

PETITIONER OR NOT?

It is humbly submitted before this hon’ble court that the petition. In case of cruelty
corroboration is generally looked for. This corroboration is afforded by evidence of
friends, relatives, neighbours or doctors who have seen then external manifestation.
 ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

1. WHETHER THE MARRIAGE WILL GET VALIDITY UNDER

HINDU MARRIAGE ACT 1955?

the respondent’s father fraudulently represented that she was treated for sun-stroke and
ceberal malaria for obtaining consent from appellant’s father but not appellant. The
respondent incurably of unsound mind for continuous period of not less than three years
in yaravada mental hospital.

1.1 THE ANNULMENT OF MARRIAGE UNDER HINDU MARRIAGE ACT 1955

according to section 12 (1) (c) of the Hindu marriage Act 1955, If any
marriage solemnised, that the consent of the petitioner, or where the
consent of the guardian in marriage of the petitioner, the consent of such
guardian was obtained by fraud as to any material fact, shall be voidable
and may be annulled by a decree of nullity.

Schizloprenia-mental disorder characterised by the abnormal social

behaviour and failure to understand the reality.

The respondent was treated at yaravada mental hospital for schizophrenia,

but the respondent’s father B. R. Abhyankar wrote two letters to the
appellant’s father saying in the first of these that respondent “had a little
misfortune before going to japan in that she had a bad attack of sunstroke
which affected her mental condition for some time”. In the second letter
which followed at an interval of two days, “ceberal malaria” was
mentioned as an additional affection of the mental affection.
Alternatively, the respondent was treated in above mentioned hospital for
her incurable mental disorder about three years. But the respondent’s
father
1 WHETHER THE BURDEN OF PROOF OF CRUELTY LIES ON
THE PETITIONER OR NOT?

On the question of condonation of cruelty, a specific provision of a specific enactment

has to be interpreted, namely s. 10 (1) (b). The enquiry, therefore, has to be whether the
conduct charged as cruelty is of such a character as to cause in the mind of the petitioner
a reasonable apprehension that it will be harmful or injurious for him to live with the
respondent.

1.1 CRUELTY

Cruelty as a ground for matrimonial relief has been provided under all personal
law statutes. It is a conduct of such a character as to cause danger to life limb or
health bodily or mental, or as to give raise to reasonable apprehension of such
danger. The concept of cruelty varied from time to time, from place to place
and individual to individual in its application to social status of the person
involved and the economic conditions and other matters.

1.2 BURDON OF PROOF FROM THE PETITIONER

Acts like the tearing of the Mangal Sutra, locking out the husband when he is due to
arrive from the office, rubbing of chilly powder on the tongue of an infant child, beating
a child mercilessly while in high fever and switching on the light at night and sitting by
the bedside of the husband merely to nag him are acts which tend to destroy the
legitimate ends and objects of matrimony.

The conduct of wile amounts to cruelty within the meaning of section. 10 (1) (b) of the
Hindu marriage Act. The threat that she would put an end to her own life or that she
will set the house on fire, the threat that she will make the husband lose his job and have
the matter published in newspapers and the persistent abuses and insults hurled at the
husband and his parents are all of so grave an order as to 'imperil the appellant's sense
of personal safety, mental happiness, job satisfaction and reputation.