(2013) 2 Supreme Court Cases 114
U. SREE Vs U. SRINIVAS
A. Family and Personal Laws – Hindu Law – Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Ss. 13(1)(i-a) and 23 – “Mental cruelty” – question whether wife treated her husband with – Proof – Husband used to practice and learn music in presence of his father, who was also his “Guru” – Wife showing immense dislike towards “Sadhna” of her husband in music and exhibiting indifference and contempt of tradition of teacher and disciple – She having no concern for pubic image of her husband and putting him in embarrassing situations leading to humiliation including before his father and “Guru” – She making wild allegations about conspiracy in family of her husband to get him remarried for greed of dowry – No evidence to substantiate such allegations – Thus, apart from aspersions cast on character of husband, there were maladroit efforts to malign reputation of family of husband – On such facts, held, husband proved his case of mental and Phrases – “Cruelty” – Penal Code, 1860, S. 498-A
B. Family and Personal Laws – Hindu Law – Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Ss. 25 and 23 – Decree of divorce – Grant of permanent alimony to wife – Factors to be considered – No arithmetic formula, held, can be adopted therefor – However, status of parties, their respective social needs, financial capacity of husband and other obligations must be taken into account – Duty of court is to see that wife lives with dignity and comfort and not in penury – Though living need not be luxurious, court has to act with pragmatic sensibility that wife does not meet any kind of man-made misfortune – In present case, husband, who was famous in world of music, had been performing musical concerts in India and abroad – Regard being had to status of husband, social strata to which parties belonged and earlier orders of Supreme Court in this case, permanent alimony fixed at concerned, 50 lakhs – Out of the said amount to be deposited before Family Judge 20 lakhs directed to be kept in a fixed deposit in name of son in a nationalized bank – Any amount deposited earlier, clarified, would stand excluded
C. Evidence Act, 1872 – S. 65(a) – Secondary evidence – Admissibility of – Necessary requirements – Foundational evidence to be laid for leading secondary evidence – Absence thereof – Effect of – Secondary evidence, held, is inadmissible in such a case – Hence, in absence of said foundational evidence in present case, view taken by court concerned that when the alleged original letter was summoned and there was denial in respect thereof, secondary evidence in form of Photostat copy of that letter was admissible, held, not sustainable in law
D. Evidence Act, 1872 – Ss. 62 to 65 – Reiterated, mere admission of a document in evidence does not amount to its proof – Therefore, it is the obligation of court to decide question of admissibility of a document in secondary evidence before making endorsement thereon
E. Practice and Procedure – Issues in question/Issues pleaded only to be considered – No pleading or prayer made for divorce on ground of desertion – Conclusion as to desertion arrived at by courts below in case of – Held, erroneous – Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Ss. 13(1)(i-b) and 23 – Constitution of India – Art. 136 – Civil Procedure Code, 1908, S. 33 and Or. 20 Rr.4(2), 5 & 6 and Or. 14 Rr. 2 & 3 and Or. 6 Rr. 1 & 2 and Or. 7 Rr. 1 & 7