The party seeking divorce has to be innocent of blame. In the instant case, the wife admittedly suffered brain damage after her caesarean operation. It was not a matter of dispute, that she had remained unconscious for sometime even after having delivered a baby. Her husband seems to have initially extended full financial support, by seeking consultation of specialists in fields wherein the wife needed assistance. But subsequently, the husband refrained from extending emotional or moral support to her. He filed divorce petition on ground of cruelty but failed to establish that her behaviour was aggressive, erratic or abnormal, or that he was subject to cruelty on account of such behaviour. The wife had suffered brain damage leading to cognitive deficiencies. Yet, despite the said deficiencies, her working memory has returned to ‘near normal' after treatment. The husband has offered to pay compensation to wife and for seeking divorce but the wife did not consent to the severance of matrimonial ties. The Supreme Court has held that the issue in hand should be adjudged by asking whether the husband would have accepted such a plea of acceptance of compensation if the wife had filed the divorce petition that her husband had suffered brain damage. The Court held that on a reversal of roles, the husband, without any fault of his own, would have never accepted as just, the dissolution of his matrimonial ties.
Darshan Gupta v. Radhika Gupta, CA Nos. 6332-6333 of 2009; Decided on 1-7-2013 (SC) [P. Sathasivam and Jagdish Singh Khehar, JJ.]
No comments:
Post a Comment