
Filing False Complaints Against Spouse is Cruelty, Rules Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court ruled that filing false complaints against a spouse amounts to cruelty. The court upheld the husband’s divorce, citing mental harassment by the wife.
The Delhi High Court ruled that filing false complaints against a spouse amounts to cruelty. The court upheld the husband’s divorce, citing mental harassment by the wife.
The Supreme Court has put divorce proceedings on hold after a woman requested her husband’s cooperation in IVF treatment. She also filed for the case to be transferred from Bhopal to Lucknow.
The Delhi High Court ruled that a husband’s financial instability, leading to anxiety and distress for his wife, can be considered mental cruelty, granting divorce on these grounds.
The Madras High Court ruled that watching porn and self-pleasure are not valid reasons for divorce, emphasizing a spouse’s right to privacy and the need for strong evidence in marital disputes.
The Karnataka High Court ruled that alimony is meant to provide financial stability to a dependent spouse, not to penalize the other spouse. The court upheld a maintenance order, emphasizing the husband’s financial responsibility.
The Karnataka High Court granted a divorce after a wife insulted her husband’s dark complexion, falsely accused him of an affair, and refused to withdraw complaints. The court ruled that these actions amounted to cruelty.
The Kerala High Court ruled that family courts must set a specific time frame for case disposal instead of stating that cases will be resolved “at the earliest.” Learn about this ruling and its significance.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed a woman’s appeal against a family court decision granting her husband’s divorce plea. The court cited vulgar chats with other men as mental cruelty.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that a husband must financially support his wife, even if he is a professional beggar. The court emphasized that it is both a moral and legal responsibility.
The Madras High Court overturned a family court order that required a wife to pay maintenance to her husband, ruling that he was capable of earning a livelihood.