The Telangana High Court held that permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act requires a separate application and cannot be granted automatically in divorce proceedings. The Court ruled formal pleading is necessary before awarding maintenance.
The Madras High Court held that a wife’s police complaint against husband or matrimonial family cannot alone amount to mental cruelty unless proven false or malicious. The Court dismissed husband’s divorce plea, protecting a spouse’s right to seek legal remedies.
The Supreme Court dissolved a marriage under Article 142 of the Constitution, holding that the relationship had irretrievably broken down and was “dead for all practical purposes.” The Court set aside decisions of the Family Court and Andhra Pradesh High Court while directing a comprehensive financial settlement.
The Supreme Court held that persistent refusal of sexual relations without reasonable cause constitutes mental cruelty and can be a valid ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act. Upholding a Rajasthan High Court judgment, the Court dismissed a wife’s appeal challenging the dissolution of marriage.
The Madras High Court observed that voluntary removal of the thali may, depending on the facts of a case, cause emotional anguish and amount to mental cruelty. However, the Court clarified that removal of the thali is not automatically a ground for divorce and must be assessed in context.
The Allahabad High Court held that Lok Adalats and District Legal Services Authorities cannot grant divorce decrees, ruling that only family courts possess jurisdiction to dissolve marriages, while Lok Adalats are limited to facilitating settlements and lack authority to exercise judicial powers in matrimonial disputes.
Today, On 11th May, The Supreme Court refused to hear a plea challenging Hindu Marriage Act rule letting only the wife seek divorce after a year of no cohabitation. The CJI asked, “Do you think you head the entire male gender group?”
The Gujarat High Court held that an LLB qualification cannot be used to deny a divorced woman her right to maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC. The Court stressed that education alone cannot negate financial dependence entirely.
The Bombay High Court ruled that a spouse alleging mental cruelty need not justify or explain the reasons behind such conduct. It held that requiring justification contradicts settled legal principles under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Invoking Article 142, the Supreme Court dissolved an irretrievably broken marriage, holding that its continuance would only prolong agony. The Court granted divorce despite trial and High Court findings, stressing complete justice over rigid statutory grounds of law.
