K. SRINIVAS versus K. SUNITA
The Supreme Court held that the respondent-wife had knowingly and intentionally filed a false criminal complaint against the appellant-husband and his family, and even a single such complaint is sufficient to constitute matrimonial cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act. Therefore, the marriage was dissolved on this ground.
- Parties
- Appellant: K. Srinivas; Respondent: K. Sunita
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 19 November 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Decision on Appeal From High Court
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed. Marriage dissolved under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act.
- Legal Topics
- Divorce, Cruelty as Ground for Divorce, False Criminal Complaints, Hindu Marriage Act
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
K. Srinivas
Appellant
K. Sunita
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Decision on Appeal From High Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether filing a false criminal complaint by the wife constitutes cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, entitling the husband to a divorce.
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court held that the respondent-wife had knowingly and intentionally filed a false criminal complaint against the appellant-husband and his family, and even a single such complaint is sufficient to constitute matrimonial cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act. Therefore, the marriage was dissolved on this ground.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed. Marriage dissolved under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act.
Orders
- Marriage of the parties is dissolved under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
- The parties shall bear their respective costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment