Divorce on grounds of earlier marriage not acceptable: HC

HC said that the husband knew that the wife was a divorcee when he married her 

NT Correspondent

Bengaluru: The High Court of Karnataka has dismissed an appeal filed by a 50-year-old seeking divorce from his wife on grounds that she was a divorcee and the fact was hid from him. The family court rejected his petition for divorce, and he had challenged it before a division bench of the High Court in an appeal. The bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar however, found that he knew of the fact that his wife was a divorcee.

The Court said, “The appellant (husband) has admitted in the cross-examination that he collected the family background and particulars pertaining to the respondent at the time of their marriage and their marriage was arranged with the consent of the elders of both sides. He has also admitted in the cross-examination that marriage negotiations were held in the presence of the elders and relatives on both sides. Relying on the said evidence, the trial Court has rightly come to the conclusion that the appellant was aware that the respondent (wife) was a divorcee.”

More evidence The Court also noticed that the resident of Karkala in Udupi had lived with his wife for a considerable time. “The appellant has admitted that he and the respondent were residing at Thekkatte in the house of his maternal aunt and thereafter for four months in a rented house at Thekkatte. Even the appellant had contacted the respondent when he was in Saudi Arabia and had sent money for her medical expenses,” the court noted.

The husband also claimed that his wife was unable to perform conjugal duties. The HC rejected this claim too. On the advice of medical experts, the wife had her uterus removed in 2009. This was three years after their wedding in 2006.

“The trial Court has opined that removal of the uterus may not come in the way of performing a conjugal obligation and therefore, the appellant cannot be permitted to take up such contention against his legally wedded wife,” the HC said. The HC also dismissed the allegation of cruelty.

“Divorce was also sought on the ground of cruelty, stating that the respondent had quarrelled with the family members regarding not allotting equal share in the partition. The said aspect cannot be said to be cruelty as the respondent has asserted her right to claim an equal share in the properties,” the HC said, dismissing the appeal.