A high court in Karnataka has granted a divorce to a 44-year-old woman based on the cruelty of her husband who lived in India to her earnings from the United Arab Emirates. The court ruled that the husband, 55, treated his wife like “a profitable cow and had a material attitude towards her”.
“The appellant had no emotional relations with the appellant. The defendant’s position in itself caused psychological suffering and emotional trauma to the appellant, which is enough to find a cause of mental cruelty,” the court ruled while granting the divorce on June 21.
The woman applied to the Supreme Court after the family court rejected her divorce application on the grounds that there was no cruelty as she claimed.
The panel of the Supreme Court, consisting of Justice Alok Arady and Judge J.
The couple, who married in 1999 in Karnataka, faced many financial problems which led to the wife moving to the United Arab Emirates in 2008 to work in a bank to make a living for the family. Using her earnings, she paid off her husband’s family debts and also invested in his small business in the United Arab Emirates – which he abandoned after a short time, according to the appeal.
The Supreme Court, after examining the documents and the statement of accounts submitted by the woman, said that “various transactions totaling Rs 60,000 total” were made in favor of the husband by the woman and allowed the appeal against the family court order.
“The family court made a fatal mistake in not appreciating the appellant’s transcript, and it should have been appreciated because the appellant’s testimony was not even cross-examined. Therefore, there is no compelling reason not to accept the appellant’s indisputable testimony. Thus, the reason for the dissolution of the marriage is on the grounds of cruelty as it is. provided for in Section 10(X) of the Act has been determined,” the Supreme Court ruled.
It also rescinded the decree and judgment of the Family Court on June 22, 2020, and ordered and decreed divorce under the Divorce Act Section 10(X) [has treated the petitioner with such cruelty as to cause a reasonable apprehension in the mind of the petitioner that it would be harmful or injurious for the petitioner to live with the respondent].