Read Time: 07 minutes

The Delhi High Court recently allowed an appeal filed by a wife against her husband under Section 13(1)(ia) and 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA) seeking a decree of divorce after observing that the wife was viewed as a cash cow and that the husband became interested in her only after she got the job with the Delhi Police.

"Such brazenly materialistic attitude of the respondent, with no emotional ties, would have in itself caused mental agony and trauma to the appellant sufficient to constitute cruelty to her", held a bench of Justices Vipin Sanghi and Jasmeet Singh.

The marriage between the parties was solemnized in December, 2000 when the appellant wife was barely 13 years of age, whereas, the respondent-husband was 19 years old.

After the appellant attained majority in 2005, she continued to reside at her parental home till November 2014 and during this period, she continued her studies and on account of her own merit, secured a job with Delhi Police.

It was noted by the bench that since 2005, the appellant’s family tried to persuade the respondent to take the appellant to the matrimonial home but he showed no interest.

"It was only after the appellant got a job with Delhi Police in the year 2014, that the respondent became interested in calling the appellant to the matrimonial home on account of the fact that she had secured a stable job and income", opined the Court.

The appellant further told the Court that her husband was unemployed and was an alcoholic, who used to physically abuse her, and demand money from her.

After an interaction with the respondent, the Court found it to be absolutely clear that his interest in continuing with the relationship was only on account of the fact that the appellant has a job with Delhi Police, and he viewed the alleged expenditure – which he claimed he has incurred on the education of the appellant (and which is disputed by the appellant), as an investment, which would not bear fruit in case parties were to part ways with judicial intervention.

"Since she was living with her parents till 2014, it is obvious that all her expenses for living and upbringing would have been borne by her parents", further noted the Court.

The Bench further added,

"The respondent, it appears, viewed the appellant as a cash cow and became interested in her only after she got the job with the Delhi Police. Such brazenly materialistic attitude of the respondent, with no emotional ties, would have in itself caused mental agony and trauma to the appellant sufficient to constitute cruelty to her. We cannot ignore, that generally it is the desire of every married woman – particularly belonging to the economic strata to which the parties belong, to get married and start a family. However, in the case in hand, it appears the respondent was not interested in nurturing the marriage, but only interested in the appellant’s income."

Thus, the High Court found it to be a clear case of perpetration of mental cruelty and went on to set aside the impugned judgment of the Family Court and allow the appeal.

Cause Title: Sanno Kumari v Krishnan Kumar