Dastane V. Dastane summary

N.G. DASTANE Vs. S. DASTANE

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

1975

CASE ON SECTION 13 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, DEALS WITH CRUELTY AND CONDONATION

Facts of the case :

The petitioner and the respondent were the husband and wife who parted company on February 27, 1961. The husband filed the petition on February 19,1962 for annulment of marriage or alternatively for divorce or judicial seperation. 

Contention of the parties :

Petitioner : The husband demanded the decree of annulment of marriage under section 12(I)(c) on the ground the his consent was taken by fraud. Alternatively he filed for divorce under section 13(I)(iii) on the grounds that his wife is incurably of unsound mind. Alternatively he demanded for judicial seperation under section 10(1)(b) on the grounds of cruelty. He alleged that respondent had treated him with such kind of cruelty that it created reasonable apprehension in his mind that it would be harmful or dangerous for him to live with her. 

Wife : She contended that no such continuous acts were committed that constitutes cruelty to her husband. Moreover if it is considered that the act of cruelty has been done, then also the condonation has been done by the husband willfully as she was pregnant at the time she parted. 

Question before the court :

1. Whether the wife was of unsound mind or whether the fraud was done with husband for obtaining his consent or whether the act of cruelty was done by the wife.
2. Even if the act of cruelty has taken place, whether the condonation by husband occured. 

JUDGEMENT : 

The Supreme Court of India in this case ruled that there is nothing for establishing that wife was of unsound mind or there was fraud for obtaining the petitioner's consented. However there was sufficient proof to establish that there was the act of cruelty on the part of the wife. Therefore the supreme court grant the appellant to be limited to question of judicial seperation on the ground of cruelty by the wife. 

The court observed that neither section 10 nor section 23 establishes for the fact to ve proven beyond the reasonable doubt as in the cases if criminal nature. Here as it is the civil case therefore the word 'satisfied' means 'satisfied on the preponderance of probabilities.' 

Moreover the court observed that cruelty in these cases need not to be proved as the cruelty on reasonable man. In matrimonial disputes, cruelty just need to be proved as creating reasonable apprehension in the mind of the other spouse on whom it is done. In this case, by the facts it can be established that the actions of wife like switching on lights in the night and nag the husband, beating child with high fever with stick, warning of burning the house constitutes cruelty and are not the mere wear and tear of married life.

Regarding the question of condonation, the court observed that cohabiting with the spouse after single or two act of cruelty does not implied condonation but leading a normal sexual life with partner even after their act of cruelty leads to condonation. In this case it is observed that husband continued to live a normal sexual life with the wife without explaining any reasons for the same and thus act of condonation can be inferred. However this condonation does not mean forgiveness is implied for the future actions as well. In case of revival of the original cause of action the cruelty can be still be held. In this case the husband snatched every chance and wasted no opportunity in labelling his wife as mad and of unsound mind in the consequent actions of her cruelty which is assumed to be wrong and unfounded. 

Therefore, it was concluded that the respondent was guilty for cruelty but the appellant condoned it and the subsequent conduct of the respondent is not as such to establish the act of revival of original cause of action.

Therefore the appeal held dismissed.