Divorce petition under Section 13(1)(ia) Hindu Marriage Act with index, memo of parties and affidavit
0 of 87 blanks filled
IN THE COURT OF THE LD. PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY
COURTS, NOIDA, UTTAR PRADESH
H.M.A. NO. HMA case number /Year
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Petitioner's name… PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondent's name… RESPONDENT
P.S.:-
I N D E X
| S.NO. | PARTICULARS | C. FEE | PAGES |
| 1. | MEMO OF PARTIES |
| 2. | PETITION UNDER SECTION 13(1)(ia) OF THE HMA FOR DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE ALONGWITH AFFIDAVIT |
| 3. | LIST OF DOCUMENTS ALONGWITH DOCUMENTS |
| 4. | VAKALATNAMA |
NOIDAPETITIONER
DATEDTHROUGH
COUNSEL
Counsel's name
Address: Counsel's address
M- Counsel's mobile number,
Email- Counsel's email
IN THE COURT OF THE LD. PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY
COURTS, NOIDA, UTTAR PRADESH
H.M.A. NO. HMA case number /Year
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Petitioner's name… PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondent's name… RESPONDENT
P.S.:-
MEMO OF PARTIES
Sh. Petitioner's name
S/o Sh. Petitioner's father's name
R/o Petitioner's address
e-Mail- Petitioner's emailPetitioner's signature — PETITIONER
Versus
Ms. Respondent's name
D/o Sh. Respondent's father's name
R/o Respondent's address
Also at:- Respondent's alternate address
Respondent's details line
e-Mail- Respondent's emailRespondent's signature — RESPONDENT
NOIDAPETITIONER
DATEDTHROUGH
COUNSEL
Counsel's name
Address: Counsel's address
M- Counsel's mobile number,
Email- Counsel's email
IN THE COURT OF THE LD. PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY
COURTS, NOIDA, UTTAR PRADESH
H.M.A. NO. HMA case number /Year
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Petitioner's name… PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondent's name… RESPONDENT
P.S.:-
PETITION UNDER SECTION 13(1)(ia) OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955, AS AMENDED UPTO DATE, FOR DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE BY A DECREE OF DIVORCE
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-
1.That the petitioner is a law-abiding citizen of India and has full faith in the system of administration of law. That the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on Date of marriage according to Hindu rites and customs at Marriage venue hotel name Hotel, Marriage venue city, Marriage venue state. That the marriage was solemnized in the presence of close family members and friends without any demand of dowry.
A copy of the marriage card and the marriage certificate is annexed herewith as Annexure-1 (colly) and Annexure-2 respectively.
2.That the status, age and addresses of the parties before the marriage and at the time of filing of the present petition were/are as follows:
AT THE TIME OF MARRIAGE
| HUSBAND | WIFE |
| STATUS & AGE | PLACE OF RESIDENCE | STATUS & AGE | PLACE OF RESIDENCE |
| HINDU, BACHELOR & Husband's age at time of marriage YEARS | Husband's residence at time of marriage; Husband's residence at time of marriage (contd.); Husband's residence at time of marriage (contd.) | HINDU, UNMARRIED & Wife's age at time of marriage YEARS | Wife's residence at time of marriage; Wife's residence at time of marriage (contd.); Wife's residence at time of marriage (contd.) |
AT THE TIME OF FILING OF PETITION
| HUSBAND | WIFE |
| STATUS & AGE | RESIDENCE | STATUS & AGE | RESIDENCE |
| HINDU, MARRIED & Husband's age at filing YEARS | Husband's residence at filing | HINDU, MARRIED & Wife's age at time of filing YEARS | Wife's residence at filing |
3.That right from the inception of the marriage and till the time of filing of this petition, the respondent has treated the petitioner with utmost cruelty, rendering the marriage liable to be dissolved under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act.
4.That the petitioner and the respondent went to Honeymoon destination on their honeymoon. However, from the very first day of the honeymoon, the respondent did not permit the petitioner to have physical relations with her. Upon the petitioner asking her the reason for her conduct, the respondent stated that she did not wish to have a child for at least five years. When the petitioner explained that he was a well-qualified person and was aware of the benefits of protection, the respondent remained adamant and categorically stated that she would never permit the same. The petitioner, believing that she might be angry with him, tried his level best to remain calm and to ascertain the true reason for her refusal, but she remained rigid and denied physical intimacy. When the petitioner attempted to telephone her parents to apprise them of her attitude, she created a scene in the hotel room, upon which the manager and the staff came to the room and enquired as to what had happened. The respondent abused the staff for arriving so late at the hotel room, and the scene continued in the hotel throughout the night. When the manager warned the respondent that the police would be called, she became somewhat quiet, but once the staff had left, she again blamed the petitioner, alleging that her reputation had been tarnished in front of the hotel staff, and stated that she did not wish to remain in the hotel. It was the petitioner who tried his level best to keep her comfortable throughout the night, but she showed no sympathy towards the petitioner. When the petitioner agreed to stay apart from her, she agreed to stay the night in the hotel. Throughout the night, the petitioner wondered what kind of person the respondent was, why she had created such a scene in front of the hotel staff, and why she refused to have physical intimacy as husband and wife. It was the petitioner's dream that, upon planning his honeymoon after marriage, he would lay the foundation of his family life; but owing to the respondent's conduct, the petitioner's dreams were entirely shattered.
5.That on the following day, the respondent apologised for her conduct, and the entire day passed pleasantly for the petitioner; they had proper breakfast, lunch and dinner, explored places throughout the day, and clicked photographs and made videos. The petitioner dismissed the previous night as a nightmare, but he was mistaken. At approximately 11:30 p.m. on the second day of their honeymoon, when the petitioner sought physical intimacy, the respondent repeated her earlier refusal, stating that she was not at all interested in having physical relations with him, and made several excuses for denying the petitioner physical intimacy. The respondent said "Respondent's statement refusing physical relations". The petitioner could not understand her attitude and was conscious that pressing the matter would have an adverse impact upon the future life of both the petitioner and the respondent. The petitioner therefore compromised, and for the remainder of the honeymoon he did not insist upon physical intimacy, tried his best to keep her happy, and did everything according to the respondent's choice.
6.That after the honeymoon, the petitioner carried many bitter memories, but he shared them neither with his family members nor with the respondent's family members, and tried to carry on with his life. However, things did not become workable for the petitioner. The initial few days after the marriage were among the most difficult for him; he was unable to concentrate on his work, could not sleep properly for days, and started taking sleeping pills. The respondent did not care about any of this and behaved as if everything was normal.
7.That it is submitted that after the marriage, the petitioner and the respondent resided at a 2 BHK rented property in City where the couple resided after marriage, and the petitioner's mother visited the newly-wed couple there in Month and year of petitioner's mother's visit, when numerous domestic disputes took place between the petitioner's mother and the respondent, and the respondent behaved very disrespectfully towards her. The respondent left the petitioner's mother alone in the house and went to a friend's place in the same society. The respondent spoke ill of the petitioner's mother in front of her friends, saying that her mother-in-law was mad and had some kind of ghost soul in her. The petitioner was informed of the entire incident by his friend, and he rushed home from his flying duties only to find his mother waiting for him alone. It was highly irresponsible of the respondent to abandon her mother-in-law for so long over a petty domestic quarrel. The respondent humiliated the petitioner by speaking ill of his mother in front of their common friends. The incident left the petitioner's mother baffled and mentally disturbed, as a result of which the petitioner took her to a psychiatrist, who prescribed her certain medicines.
8.That it is imperative to note that the respondent was not willing to accept the petitioner's mother from the very inception of the marriage and was entirely opposed to her residing at the petitioner's residence at Matrimonial home city, as a result of which the petitioner's mother returned to Petitioner's family home city in Month petitioner's mother returned. It is submitted that the respondent also habitually objected to the petitioner providing financial assistance to his mother.
9.That the respondent went to her parental home at Respondent's parental home city for a period of approximately forty days amid the fights and domestic discord. It was at her own volition that she left and chose to stay away for so long. The petitioner remained at Matrimonial home city and continued his employment, and upon the respondent's return from Respondent's parental home city, she frequently invited her relatives and friends for lunch and dinner, always treated them with respect, and showered them with love and affection, while on the other hand she invariably treated her husband with contempt and condescension. From the initial days of the marriage, the respondent developed a hatred towards the petitioner and his parents and began treating them as inferior. The petitioner was hurt and perturbed by such conduct, but he remained hopeful that he would gradually win over her love, respect and affection.
10.That it is submitted that the petitioner, the respondent and the petitioner's parents travelled to Anniversary trip destination for a period of Duration of anniversary trip to celebrate the parents' marriage anniversary, which falls on Date of petitioner's parents' anniversary. That the respondent mentally harassed the petitioner throughout the trip and treated him and his parents with utmost cruelty. That the respondent repeatedly objected to the petitioner spending money on his parents' travel, stay and overall expenditure in Anniversary trip destination, and remarked, "SHADI KE ITNE DIN BAAD BHI MUJHE AUSTRLIA NAHI LE JA SAKE AUR APNE MAA BAU JI KI BAAT HUE TO UNKE LIYE PLANNING AUR TICKET SAB HO GAYA, MERE LIYE TUMARE PAAS PAISE NAHI HAIN AUR APNE MAA BAU JI KO DUNIYA GHUMA RAHE HO, TUMARE JAISA NEECH AADMI MAINE NAHI DEKHA", and she remained abusive towards the petitioner's parents throughout the trip. Whenever the parents gifted her presents such as clothes and sandals from the shopping complex, the respondent was pleased, thanked the parents and showed affection towards them, but she persistently taunted the petitioner, saying, "TUMNE APNE PARENTS PER KHARCHA KYU KIA AUR UNKO YANHA LANE KI KYA JARURAT HAI ANNIVERSARY HI TOH HAI HARIDWAR MEI BHI MANA SAKTYE THE WO MUJHE WHO BILKUL PASSAND NAHI HAI AUR AB MEI TUMKO APNE PASS ANYE NAHI DUNGI AUR KABHI BHI TUMHE FAMILY KHUSHI NAHI DUNGI".
11.That the respondent did not make even a token effort to establish healthy relations with her parents-in-law, but instead went out of her way to ruin the vacation which the petitioner had planned for his parents' anniversary. That the petitioner, being a devoted only son, sought to organise a memorable trip for the entire family on an important family occasion, but the respondent not only managed to sabotage the entire trip but also strained the relations between the petitioner and his father. It is submitted that upon the parties' return to Matrimonial home city from Anniversary trip destination, the petitioner and the respondent had numerous altercations, in the course of which the respondent claimed that she hated the petitioner's parents because the petitioner provided financial assistance to them, and that she believed his parents were interested only in his money.
12.That the petitioner and the respondent celebrated their first marriage anniversary in Month of parties' first anniversary, and both of them invited their parents and brothers to celebrate the joyous occasion. The petitioner paid for all their tickets and their stay at the resort. That during the entire anniversary celebration, the respondent vexed the petitioner by comparing her parents with the petitioner's parents and complaining about them, and remarked, "APNE MAA BAAP KE LIYE AUSTRLIA PLAN KIYA AUR MERE LIYE YE GHATIA RESORT", and she abused the petitioner in front of the relatives on several occasions for having booked an inexpensive resort. The petitioner could not respond, since all the relatives present requested that no such steps be taken as would adversely affect the relations between the respondent and them.
13.That it is submitted that the petitioner and the respondent shifted to a new rented accommodation, and the respondent called her brother, Mr. Respondent's brother's name, to the new residence at Matrimonial home city in Month respondent's brother arrived to search for employment, as he had been unemployed since Year respondent's brother became unemployed. That the respondent's brother stayed at the petitioner's residence for a month while searching for a job, and the petitioner bore all his expenses. It is submitted that the respondent's brother did not secure any employment and left for Respondent's parental home city in Month respondent's brother departed, and the respondent compelled the petitioner to pay for his flight tickets. That it is imperative to note that the respondent never had any objection to the petitioner providing financial assistance to her parents and brothers; however, whenever the petitioner attempted to provide financial assistance to his own parents, she objected, mentally harassed him and created scenes.
14.That it is pertinent to mention here that the respondent, from the very beginning of the marriage, has prioritised her own family over her in-laws and has consistently looked upon them with disfavour. That the respondent compelled the petitioner to render financial assistance to her parents and brother, but did not permit the petitioner to render similar assistance to his own family. That the respondent's narrow-minded attitude strained the relations between the petitioner and his family, and the respondent asserted that her parents were her foremost priority and that the petitioner's parents were of the least importance to her; accordingly, she insisted that the petitioner summon his parents to assist in shifting the household, as she did not wish to trouble her own parents with laborious tasks. That the petitioner and his parents, always endeavouring to maintain healthy and peaceful relations, acceded to her unreasonable demands and came to Matrimonial home city to assist in the relocation, and left for Petitioner's family home city as soon as the work was completed.
15.That the respondent frequently harassed the petitioner mentally by quarrelling with him and by speaking ill of his family, thereby tormenting him; however, in Month of the physical abuse incident, unlike every earlier occasion, the respondent went to the extent of physical abuse, slapped the petitioner and used highly abusive language, saying, "TU BILKUL CHUTIA HAI AUT CHUTIA RAHEGA, TERE MAA BAAP TERA FAYDA UDHA RAHE HAIN BEBKOOF, KUCH TO SAMJH RAKH". That such conduct on the part of the respondent towards the petitioner caused severe physical, mental, financial and emotional harassment to the petitioner. That the petitioner, petrified by the entire incident, called his father and informed him that he sought a divorce from the respondent, as he could no longer tolerate her conduct. That the petitioner's father concurred, and the petitioner, being frightened and utterly broken and unwilling to stay any longer with the respondent, booked the respondent's flight tickets to Respondent's parental home city the very next day. The petitioner also informed the respondent's parents of her conduct.
16.That the respondent's actions are grave and weighty in nature and constitute cruelty. The domestic disputes between the petitioner and the respondent are of a seriousness far beyond the ordinary wear and tear of married life. That the respondent, through her oppressive conduct, has not only harassed the petitioner but has also created a divide within the petitioner's family. It is submitted that the petitioner and the respondent remained out of contact with each other for seven months, i.e., from Month parties stopped contacting each other to Month parties resumed contact, and the petitioner's father approached the respondent's parents seeking a mutual divorce, but they declined. That the petitioner's grandmother passed away in Month petitioner's grandmother passed away, and the respondent accordingly went to Petitioner's family home city with the petitioner's family to perform the funeral rites. That the respondent's family and the petitioner's family persuaded the petitioner to give the respondent another chance and to continue residing together, and the petitioner, being a soft-spoken person and a devoted husband, has overlooked various objectionable acts of the respondent in order to maintain peace and harmony in his married life.
17.That the petitioner took the respondent back to Matrimonial home city, where they resided together for a period of Duration of parties' second period of cohabitation, but the same course of conduct repeated itself. That after the same familiar pattern of daily fights, quarrels and domestic violence at the hands of the respondent, she decided to return to her parental home at Respondent's parental home city in order to have some peace of mind. That the petitioner booked her flight tickets to Respondent's parental home city and she departed. That the respondent's parents began telephoning the petitioner again and attempted to persuade him to forgive her once more, and the respondent began blaming the petitioner's fufaji and buaji (paternal uncle and aunt), telling the petitioner that they were responsible for the estrangement between the parties. It is submitted that the respondent alleged that the petitioner's fufaji and buaji were practitioners of the occult and performed black magic; the respondent resorted to petty and obnoxious tactics and even cast aspersions on the petitioner's deceased sister, repeatedly narrating to the petitioner superstitious and malevolent tales. That the respondent attempted to brainwash the petitioner into severing his relations with his fufaji and buaji (paternal uncle and aunt) and ceasing all communication with them, and she further asserted that the petitioner's parents were also under the influence of black magic and that his fufaji and buaji (paternal uncle and aunt) would destroy the entire family, as they did not desire the lives of the respondent and the petitioner to be happy and smooth. That the respondent and her family asserted that a ritual called "UCCHATAN" had been performed upon the petitioner by his buaji and fufaji (aunt and uncle), and that this was the reason the petitioner was seeking to end his relations with the respondent and her family. That the petitioner was even compelled by the respondent and her family to consult a priest and perform a puja to rid himself of the alleged black magic. That the respondent and her family employed such tactics to pressure and abuse the petitioner's family, and the respondent began quarrelling physically with the petitioner and abused him physically on multiple occasions by slapping him. That the respondent did all these things to pressure the petitioner to live separately from his parents, failing which she threatened to defame the petitioner's family and stated, "TUMHARI BUA OR FUFA JI MUJHE AUR TUMKO MARNA CHATYE HAI TUM UNKE GHER KA KUCH MAT KHAYA KARO WO US MEI KUCH MILA DETE HAI BHT KHTARNAK HAI WO LOG JAB TAK TUM APNI FAMILY SE RISHTA RAKHO GAYE MEI TUMHE APNE PASS NAHI ANE DUNGI AUR NA HI KABHI BABY KARUNGI APNI FAMILY SE RISHTA KHATM KERDO"; a copy of the email is annexed herewith as Annexure C (Colly). That the respondent is highly narcissistic, bigoted, superstitious and of unsound mind. It is evident from the facts set out above that the respondent made persistent efforts to sever the petitioner's ties with his family, and that she harassed and tortured the petitioner emotionally, mentally and physically.
18.That the respondent returned to City where the parties resided along with her parents upon securing employment as Sales Manager at Respondent's employer and branch where she worked as Sales Manager, and the respondent discussed the said employment with the petitioner prior to moving, whereupon the petitioner raised no objection or restriction and advised her to take up the job as she desired. The petitioner and the respondent resumed living together from the month of July Year of resuming cohabitation, during which period the respondent resided in City where the parties resided along with her parents. It is submitted that the petitioner bore all expenses, including rent, food and miscellaneous expenditure, for the respondent and her parents; however, the respondent, being a person of cunning disposition, coerced the petitioner into fulfilling all the illegitimate demands raised by her and her family, and threatened to commit suicide in order to compel the petitioner to agree to her demand that he abandon his parents and reside with the respondent and her parents. It is submitted that, owing to the constant fear and apprehension of false complaints being lodged against him, the petitioner suffered mental agony for years together, and the said conduct amounts to mental cruelty within the meaning of Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
19.That it is in fact the respondent who perpetrated domestic violence upon the mother of the petitioner on several occasions and treated her mother-in-law with utmost cruelty. It is pertinent to mention that the respondent and her family employed such tactics, and pressurised and abused the family of the petitioner, and further refrained from having any physical relationship with the petitioner, instead quarrelling with him physically and pressurising him to live separately from his parents and not to have any child with him, failing which she threatened to defame the petitioner and his family. It is submitted that the petitioner and his family members never demanded any dowry whatsoever from the respondent or her family; on the contrary, the petitioner and his family members acquiesced in all the demands of the respondent, whether legitimate or illegitimate, and made every effort to keep the respondent's family happy.
20.That it is further submitted that the petitioner desired to start a family for a long time; however, the respondent consistently refused to have intercourse, and every time the petitioner initiated intimacy, the respondent would rebuff him, stating that he repulsed her, that she did not want him near her body, and would offer absurd and baseless excuses.
21.That the petitioner was greatly shocked by such behaviour of the respondent, as she appeared dissatisfied with the marriage and used to quarrel with the petitioner demanding a bigger and more luxurious house. It is submitted that the respondent was highly brand-conscious and quality-conscious and never used local brands or products. The respondent further stated: “MUJHE IS 2 ROOM KE GHER MEI NAHI REHNA HAI MUJHE BADA GHER CHAHIYE WHO BHI MERE NAAM SE AGER NAHI DILWAYA TOH BHUL JAO KI TUM KABHI MERE SATH KOIE PHYSICALLY KUCH KER PAOGAYE AUR HAAN BACHA BHI BHUL JAO”.
22.That it is submitted that the respondent is a highly educated woman who desired an independent and luxurious life and wished to pursue her own passions, and the family of the petitioner always supported her, never created any obstacle, and in fact extended every assistance, supporting her pursuit of higher studies and progress in her life. A copy of the salary slip is annexed herewith as Annexure D.
23.That the petitioner, on several occasions, tried to explain to and make the respondent understand that he could not afford a new, large and luxurious house in accordance with her expectations, the same being beyond his financial capacity; however, the respondent repeatedly quarrelled and fought with the petitioner, abused the members of his family, and used to say: “KIS BHIKARI KE CHAKKAR ME PHASE GAI ME”.
24.That it is submitted that the respondent never participated in any household chores, and it was the petitioner himself who undertook all the cleaning and upkeep of the house. Whenever the petitioner expected the respondent to cook food for him, she used to say: “APNI MAA SE JA KAR BANWALE”, and further declared that she would never cook food for the petitioner; the respondent also never permitted him to come close to her.
25.That it is further submitted that the respondent used to speak to her friends and family in a secret and concealed manner and habitually consumed alcohol. It is submitted that the respondent demanded money from the petitioner almost on a daily basis, but whenever the petitioner enquired why she required such sums of money, she would create a scene, create a nuisance and abuse the petitioner, threatening that if he dared to ask her that question again, she would implicate the petitioner and his family in false and frivolous cases of dowry and domestic violence.
26.That it is submitted that the petitioner made every possible effort to demonstrate his love and affection towards the respondent by supporting her and providing her full financial assistance, providing her separate accommodation as per her demand, residing separately from his family, and endeavouring to fulfil all her demands, whether within his means or even beyond them. It is further submitted that the respondent was not even in the habit of cooking food, and the petitioner himself used to cook for both of them. It is further submitted that even after purchasing a new villa costing Rs. Cost of the villa purchased in the respondent's name in the name of the respondent, and making each and every possible effort to secure a beautiful and peaceful married life, the respondent was not prepared to make any effort towards the marriage. It is submitted that the petitioner and the respondent always resided together in rented accommodation, where the respondent frequently abused, insulted and embarrassed the petitioner, as a result of which the petitioner suffered physical and mental trauma.
27.That the respondent never wished to shoulder any responsibility, and the petitioner felt greatly sorrowful, disappointed and shocked that, despite fulfilling all her demands, she now does not even permit the petitioner to meet his parents. The petitioner tried on several occasions to make her understand that neither his family nor the respondent held a lesser place in his regard, both being equally dear to him; however, the respondent remained adamant and was not even prepared to listen to the petitioner.
28.That the respondent always offered vague excuses for not having a physical relationship or cordial relations with the petitioner or his family. It is submitted that the respondent never wished to consummate the marriage and showed no love or affection towards the petitioner, and further never permitted the petitioner to have intercourse. The respondent levelled baseless allegations against the petitioner, whereas it was in fact the respondent who did not desire a child with the petitioner and, as a result, refused to consummate the marriage.
29.That the petitioner lost his employment in March Year of petitioner's job loss during the lockdown period, and it was with difficulty that the petitioner was able to pay the EMIs on the loan of Rs. Amount of loan taken for purchase of the flat taken for the purchase of a new flat in City where the parties resided at the demand of the respondent, whose name also appears in the deed. When the petitioner requested her to sell the said property so that he could repay the loan taken from the bank, the respondent did not permit it, owing to which the petitioner remained under great pressure despite being unemployed. This clearly demonstrates the intentions of the respondent, who is concerned only with money. The photograph of the e-mail from the bank, along with the bank statements, is annexed herewith as Annexure E(colly).
30.That the petitioner made every effort to keep the respondent happy and fulfilled all her desires and wishes to the best of his capabilities and means. However, the respondent remained perpetually unsatisfied and rebuffed all his efforts, and the respondent and her family members made the lives of the petitioner and his family a living hell on earth, without any fault on their part.
31.That right from the beginning of the marriage, the respondent started demanding expensive gifts from the petitioner, despite being fully aware of his financial constraints. It is submitted that the respondent was in the habit of comparing her life with that of others, which led her to insist that the petitioner purchase expensive gifts, clothes, jewellery and the like for her, and she would fly into a rage whenever her demands were not met.
32.That the respondent habitually conducted herself towards the petitioner with great harshness and cruelty, frequently abusing him in the coarsest and most insulting language. The respondent did not permit the petitioner to have physical relations with her for long periods; whenever the petitioner attempted to approach her, she resisted and threatened him with dire consequences. When the petitioner tried to explain that physical relations after marriage are a basic expectation, the respondent rebuffed him and warned him never to attempt the same again. The petitioner was thus denied his conjugal rights with his legally wedded wife. It is further submitted that when the petitioner attempted to speak to her or objected to such behaviour, the respondent threatened that she would commit suicide and implicate the petitioner and his family therein. When the petitioner requested the respondent to mend her ways and show attention towards his family, she flew into a fury and threatened to file various false and frivolous cases against him.
33.That there was no one in the petitioner's household who caused any concern or disturbance to the respondent. The petitioner's family members neither resided with the couple nor ever interfered in the marital relations between the petitioner and the respondent. Despite this, the respondent did not display even the courtesy or gesture of respect required to reciprocate the regard and respect shown to her by the petitioner and his family.
34.That during the marriage, the respondent pressurised the petitioner to sever ties with his family and to block them. It is pertinent to mention that whenever the petitioner asked the respondent to accompany him to visit his old parents, she invariably refused, created a scene, and prevented the petitioner from meeting his own parents. It is needful to mention that the respondent spent considerable time with her own parents, yet was unwilling to maintain any relationship with the petitioner's parents. A copy of the emails is annexed herewith as Annexure-F.
35.That the petitioner, being an affectionate husband, did everything possible for the care and comfort of the respondent, but was invariably met with her distant and careless behaviour.
36.That the respondent and her parents made the petitioner's life miserable; nevertheless, the petitioner tolerated the atrocities only to save the matrimonial life. The petitioner made various efforts towards reconciliation, but all in vain.
37.That it is also important to mention that the respondent has continuously committed cruelty since the beginning of the marriage, but the petitioner and his family members have consistently attempted to resolve the problems within the four corners of the family. However, the situation that has emerged is such that there is now no possibility of the respondent settling down in life with the petitioner. Therefore, the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent has broken down irretrievably, with no chance of reconciliation.
38.That the behaviour and attitude of the respondent have left a permanent scar on the heart and mind of the petitioner. It is submitted that the constant taunts and threats of the respondent have adversely affected the petitioner's mental health, and that the petitioner is suffering from depression on account of her conduct. It is needful to mention that the petitioner put in all his heart and soul to make the marriage work and to maintain love, peace and harmony in the marital relationship; however, the taunts and constant complaints of the respondent and her family have affected the petitioner to such an extent that he has lost his faith in the institution of marriage.
39.That the sense of hopelessness on the part of the petitioner and his family members arises from the fact that the respondent, her parents and her family members are unscrupulous persons with no principled ideology.
40.That the said marriage failed and turned into a nightmare for the petitioner on account of the respondent's obstinacy, lack of sensitivity, unjustified conduct and behaviour, values, sustained course of abusive and humiliating treatment, and the inconvenience caused by her. The petitioner, therefore, feels a deep sense of anguish, disappointment and frustration due to the acts, attitude and conduct of the respondent.
41.That the respondent's fits of rage comprise some or all of the following behaviours, varying with the severity of her outbursts:
-Shouting and use of abusive language
-Frequent mood swings and constant irritability
-Throwing utensils and bottles in anger on certain occasions
-Escalation in the intensity of her outbursts whenever attempts were made to calm her down
-Very high and unrealistic expectations
-Refusal to permit physical relations
1.That the petitioner and his other family members never raised any demand for dowry from the respondent or her parental family, nor did they commit any act of cruelty against the respondent at any point of time. Instead, they accepted the respondent as she was, despite her acts of cruelty and harassment.
42.That soon after moving back in together with the petitioner, the respondent began fighting again. The petitioner was tormented by quarrels day in and day out. The respondent never wanted the petitioner's parents to come to City of residence, even to visit their own son, and wanted an independent life with the petitioner and her own parents. Unable to bear the constant fights and harassment, the petitioner once again sought a mutual divorce, but the respondent and her parents refused to agree.
43.That the petitioner lost his job in Month and year of job loss upon commencement of the lockdown. The petitioner somehow managed to live in City of residence with the respondent, but was suffocating within the relationship.
44.That the respondent was facing pressure from her parents and family to have children; however, the relationship between the parties was strained and they were barely having any physical relationship, whereupon the respondent falsely blamed the petitioner for impotency.
45.That during the Duration of marriage in years of the marriage, the petitioner and the respondent had physical relations on only Number of occasions of physical relations occasions. That the petitioner and the respondent have had no physical relations since Month and year when physical relations ceased, as there was no love or affection between them.
46.It is imperative to note that although the petitioner did not desire any physical relationship with the respondent, as he no longer had any love or affection for her, the respondent falsely accused him of impotency. The petitioner had been harassed mentally, physically, emotionally and financially, and therefore did not wish to conceive a child out of such a toxic marriage. It is submitted that the respondent tortured and abused the petitioner for refusing to have a child, and falsely alleged his impotency before her friends and relatives. The respondent starved the petitioner for entire days on multiple occasions, not permitting him to eat anything. The respondent made the petitioner's life miserable, and the petitioner suffered and suffocated living under one roof with her.
47.It is stated that the Petitioner is facing grave difficulties and his family has been put to great hardship, inasmuch as, on the one hand, the Petitioner lost his employment on account of the Covid-19 pandemic, and, on the other hand, the Respondent, instead of extending support, harassed him and made his life considerably more difficult.
48.That the Petitioner and the Respondent permanently shifted to the house of the Petitioner's father at City where the Petitioner's father's house is located and left City where the parties earlier resided together forever. That the Respondent made an attempt to establish amicable relations with the parents of the Petitioner, but it was merely a facade. The Respondent soon began complaining and quarrelling with the Petitioner and his parents.
49.That the Respondent neither assisted in the daily household chores nor behaved respectfully towards the parents of the Petitioner. It is stated that the Petitioner left City where the Petitioner's father's house is located to pursue certain employment opportunities on Date on which the Petitioner left the house for employment opportunities, and soon after the Petitioner left the house, the Respondent also left the house on Date on which the Respondent left the matrimonial home, claiming that she had to visit her parental home on the occasion of the Raksha Bandhan festival, and since then the Petitioner and the Respondent have remained separated till date.
50.That the Respondent is a money-minded lady. It is of pertinent importance that neither the Respondent nor her parents contributed financially towards any of the joint expenditure from the marriage ceremony itself. It is submitted that even during the visits of the Respondent's parents to City where the parties earlier resided together, the Petitioner invariably paid for their flight tickets and bore all their expenditure. That even during the visit of the Respondent's brother, the Petitioner was compelled by the Respondent to pay for his flight tickets and all other expenses for a period of one month.
51.It is submitted that the Respondent has a habit of comparing her life with that of others, which resulted in her demanding that the Petitioner purchase expensive gifts, clothes, jewellery and the like for her, and she would become furious if her demands were not met. That the Petitioner has spent more than Approximate amount spent by the Petitioner on the Respondent on the Respondent's jewellery, shopping and dresses, and on all facilities and amenities.
52.That it is pertinent to note that the Respondent always objected when the Petitioner extended financial assistance to his own parents, and constantly attempted to create a divide between the Petitioner and his family, which eventually did happen.
53.That the Petitioner purchased one flat at City where the flat is located with the Respondent's name included therein, which is worth Value of the flat, for which the Petitioner availed a loan of Amount of loan taken for purchase of the flat from Name of the bank from which the loan was availed. It is submitted that the flat is still under dispute. That the Petitioner lost his employment owing to the Covid-19 lockdown and was facing great difficulty in paying the loan amount, and therefore decided to sell the flat in order to close the loan account. That the Respondent was fully aware of the financial crunch faced by the Petitioner, yet she is still not willing to remove her name, and therefore the Petitioner is unable to sell the flat. That the builder and the bank have sent numerous e-mails and made telephonic communications for taking possession of the flat, but the Petitioner is left totally helpless. That the Respondent stated in an e-mail: "Text of the Respondent's e-mail regarding objection to change of ownership".
54.That the Respondent and her family are money-driven and have been exploiting the Petitioner for financial benefits, and as a result, they are not willing to accept mutual divorce.
55.That the Respondent has been extremely cruel towards the Petitioner, and her family has been exploiting the Petitioner financially, mentally and emotionally.
56.That the Petitioner made every effort to keep the Respondent happy and fulfilled all her desires and wishes to the best of his capabilities and means. However, the Respondent always remained dissatisfied and pressed the Petitioner to abandon his family and live with the Respondent and her family. The Respondent and her family members made the lives of the Petitioner and his family a living hell.
57.That the Respondent is short-tempered and mentally unstable, and on several occasions lost her temper over petty issues and yelled at the Petitioner in front of family, friends and in-laws. It is submitted that the Respondent also ridiculed the Petitioner in front of his friends and colleagues. That the Respondent blackmailed the Petitioner that she would tell his friends that he was impotent if he did not comply with her illegitimate wishes. That it is pertinent to mention herein that the Respondent, being a very short-tempered person, had no decency in the words and language she used whenever she got angry. The worst aspect is that even after cooling down, she never felt remorse for her words and deeds.
58.That the Petitioner endeavoured to adjust throughout his matrimonial life. He did all acts and made all requests which would make the Respondent happy, but the Respondent refused to heed any of his requests. The Petitioner could not bear the abusive language used by the Respondent against him and his family members. Day by day, the Respondent developed hatred towards the Petitioner, mentally tortured him for petty reasons and kept cursing the Petitioner day and night. That the Respondent has the propensity of creating a traumatic environment by weeping and posing to be greatly pained and victimised.
59.That the Petitioner and his family always endeavoured to uphold the marital tie between the Petitioner and the Respondent. Shockingly, the Respondent threatened the Petitioner and his family that she would commit suicide if the Petitioner or his family were to suggest anything. However, the Petitioner, along with his family, put in their level best to assist and help the Respondent; unfortunately, everything went in vain. Furthermore, the Respondent continued her arrogant, improper, rude and cunning behaviour to meet her frivolous demands. Notably, the Respondent, since the very beginning, continued to extort as much as possible, and upon denial by the Petitioner, the Respondent not only threatened but also abetted suicide. Unfortunately, the Petitioner and his family were left with no option but to meet her improper demands. Moreover, the demands and threats of the Respondent kept on increasing, and if the Petitioner failed to meet them, the Respondent always sought to project the Petitioner in false and frivolous cases, taking advantage of her position as a woman/wife.
60.That the conduct of the Respondent has caused deep anguish, disappointment and frustration to the Petitioner, and the same amounts to mental cruelty.
61.That from the beginning of the marriage, the Respondent habitually conducted herself towards the Petitioner with great harshness and cruelty, frequently abusing him in the coarsest and most insulting language.
62.That the Respondent perpetuated the acts of cruelty on several occasions, and therefore the Petitioner was under the apprehension that it would not be desirable or safe to reside with the Respondent and to continue the marital relationship. That the Respondent did not even provide food to the Petitioner and his family and threatened to falsely implicate them in a case of dowry demand and to cast the blame upon the Petitioner and his family.
63.That the Petitioner and his other family members never raised any kind of dowry demands from the Respondent or her parental family members, nor did they commit any act of cruelty against the Respondent at any point of time. Instead, they accepted the Respondent as she was, despite her acts of cruelty and harassment.
64.It is submitted that when the Petitioner attempted to speak to her or objected to such behaviour, the Respondent threatened that she would commit suicide and hold the Petitioner and his family responsible for the same. It is submitted that when the Petitioner requested the Respondent to mend her ways and show attention to her marital family, the Respondent became furious and threatened the Petitioner that she would file various false and frivolous cases against him.
65.That the respondent was in the habit of spending lavishly on branded clothes, cosmetics, handbags and other luxury items, and used to demand money from the petitioner every now and then. When the petitioner explained to her that he had a very limited income and could not afford such lavish expenditure, the respondent would curse the petitioner and subject him to sarcastic remarks and comments.
66.That it is further pertinent to mention that, despite the petitioner continuously showering affection upon the respondent and yielding to her desire for expensive accessories and luxury goods, there was not a single occasion on which the respondent voluntarily purchased anything for the petitioner out of her own salary, nor did she ever contribute towards any household expenditure.
67.That during the subsistence of the marriage, the respondent used to pressurise the petitioner to sever ties with his family members and to block them. It is pertinent to mention that whenever the petitioner requested the respondent to accompany him to visit his old parents, she always refused, created a scene, and prevented the petitioner from meeting his own parents. It is needful to mention that the respondent spent considerable time with her own parents, yet was unwilling to maintain any relationship with the parents of the petitioner.
68.That the petitioner, being an affectionate husband, did everything possible for the care and comfort of the respondent, but was invariably disappointed by her distant and isolated behaviour.
69.That the respondent and her parents made the life of the petitioner miserable, but despite this, the petitioner tolerated all the atrocities only in order to save the matrimonial relationship. The petitioner made various efforts towards reconciliation, but all in vain.
70.That it is also important to mention here that the respondent has committed acts of cruelty continuously since the beginning of the marriage, but the petitioner and his family members have been trying to resolve the problems within the four corners of the family. However, the situation that has emerged is such that there is now no possibility of the respondent settling down in life with the petitioner. Consequently, the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent has broken down irrevocably, with no chances of reconciliation.
71.It is submitted that the constant taunts and threats of the respondent have adversely affected the mental health of the petitioner. It is submitted further that the petitioner is suffering from depression on account of the ill-treatment meted out by the respondent. It is needful to mention that the petitioner has put in all his heart and soul into making the marriage work and into maintaining love, peace and harmony in the marital relationship; however, the taunts and constant complaints of the respondent and her family have had such an impact upon the petitioner that he has lost faith in the institution of marriage itself.
72.That the sense of hopelessness on the part of the petitioner and his family members arises from the fact that the respondent, her parents and her family members have acted without scruple and have displayed no principled conduct.
73.That the said marriage failed and turned into a nightmare for the petitioner on account of the respondent's obstinacy, lack of sensitivity, unjustified conduct and behaviour, values, and her sustained course of abusive and humiliating treatment and harassment. The petitioner therefore feels a deep sense of anguish, disappointment and frustration due to the acts, attitude and conduct of the respondent.
74.That the petitioner has a genuine apprehension that it is not possible for him to live with the respondent on account of her behaviour and her acts of cruelty and harassment; hence this petition for divorce, there being no chance of reconciliation with the respondent.
75.That such adverse conduct on the part of the respondent towards the petitioner has caused severe mental, financial and emotional harassment to the petitioner.
76.That the petitioner, despite the rude behaviour of the respondent, made every effort to repair the marriage at each step, but on account of the continuous acts of cruelty committed by the respondent, the petitioner was left with no other remedy except to file the present petition.
77.That it is pertinent to mention that, on account of the cruel acts and attitude of the respondent, the petitioner is unable to continue his life with her. The behaviour of the respondent towards the petitioner has created a reasonable apprehension in the mind of the petitioner that it is not safe for him to continue the marriage.
78.That in consideration of all the facts and circumstances mentioned above, it has become very difficult for the petitioner to live with the respondent; not only does the petitioner fear for his life, but the continuation of the marriage is detrimental to his honour, reputation and social standing. As such, the petitioner is entitled to the grant of a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty.
79.That although the list of harassment and acts of cruelty committed by the respondent, voluntarily or with the undue support and misguidance of her family members, is very lengthy, only a few of the major acts and incidents of cruelty towards the petitioner have been set out herein.
80.In view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, the petitioner is left with no other alternative. Hence the petitioner is filing the present petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce, the petitioner having no other alternative efficacious remedy.
PRAYER
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to dissolve the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent by a decree of divorce under the provisions of Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1995.
Any other or further order or direction, as deemed fit and appropriate by this Hon'ble Court, in the facts and circumstances narrated hereinabove, may also be passed.
PETITIONER
VERIFICATION
I, the above-named petitioner, do hereby state on solemn affirmation that the contents of the above petition, from paragraph Number of first paragraph true to knowledge to Number of last paragraph true to knowledge, are true and correct to the petitioner's own knowledge, and those from paragraph Number of first paragraph believed on information to Number of last paragraph believed on information are believed to be true upon information received by me, and the last paragraph is the humble prayer to this Hon'ble Court. Verified at Place of verification on this Date of verification day of June, Year of verification.
PETITIONER
IN THE COURT OF LD. PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY
COURTS, NOIDA, UTTAR PRADESH
H.M.A. NO. HMA case number/Year
IN THE MATTER OF:
Petitioner's name… PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondent's name… RESPONDENT
S/o Sh. Deponent's father's name
R/o Deponent's address
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Sh. Deponent's name, aged about Deponent's age years, S/o Deponent's father's name, R/o Deponent's city, Deponent's state, E-mail: Deponent's email. I, the above-named deponent, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:
1.That the deponent is the petitioner in the present petition, is well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the present case, and is competent to swear the present affidavit.
2.That the present affidavit has been drafted by my counsel under my instructions; I have gone through the same and its contents are true and correct to my knowledge and belief, and I have understood the same in vernacular also.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified at Place of verification on this Date of verification day of June, Year of verification, that the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief; no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT