Memorial Appellant Vlc.docx

Ist NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION VIVEKANANDA LAW COLLEGE, PUTTUR

BEFORE THE HONORABLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

TEAM CODE:-

IN THE MATTER OF ………APPELLANT

KAMINI Vs.

……..RESPONDENT

RAJA

MEMORIAL FOR APPELLANT

WRITTEN AND SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT

Page 1

Ist NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION VIVEKANANDA LAW COLLEGE, PUTTUR

TABLE OF CONTENTS Pg. No 1.

BIBLIGRAPHY

03 03

2. INDEX OF AUTHORITIES 04 3. CASES REFERRED 4. STATEMENT OF FACTS

05

5. STATEMENT OF ISSUES

10

6. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

11

7. ADVANCE ARGUMENTS

12-19

8. PRAYER

20

WRITTEN AND SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT

Page 2

Ist NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION VIVEKANANDA LAW COLLEGE, PUTTUR

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 1. AIR

All India Reporter

2. Art.

Article

3. H.M.A

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

4.

Supreme Court Cases

SCC

5. SC

Supreme Court

6. v.

Versus

7. MP

Madhya Pradesh

8. HC

High Court

9. P&H

Punjab and Haryana

ACT/RULES/STATUTES REFERRED Constitution of India, 1950

List of statutes 1. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 2. The Civil Procedure Code, 1908 BOOKS REFERRED 1. Dr. Paras Diwan, Modern Hindu Law(Twentieth Edition,2011) 2. Cases and Materials on Family Law, Kusum(Universal Law House,2010)

3. MP Jain, Indian Constitution 1950 (Eighth edition)

WRITTEN AND SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT

Page 3

Ist NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION VIVEKANANDA LAW COLLEGE, PUTTUR

LIST OF CASES S.No. 1.

2.

Cases Referred Sharda vs Dharmpal, AIR 2003 SC 3450 Vinita Saxena vs Pankaj Pandit, AIR 2006 SC 1662 Narendra v.K Meena, AIR 2016 SC 4591 (2016)9SCC455

3. 4.

BRB v. J.B, (1968) 2AII.ER 1023

5.

Smt Ningamma v. Chikkaiah , LQ 1999 HC 10003

6.

Bhagat v Bhagat, AIR 1994 SC 710

7.

Avinash Prasad Srivastava vs. Smt. Chandra Mohini, AIR 1964 All 486

8.

Kalest Sky v. Kalest Sky, 1950 (2) All.ER 398

9.

Parveen Mehta vs Inderjeet Mehta, 2002(5) SCC 706

10.

Jagdish Kumar S/o Tilak Raj vs. Smt. Sita Devi D/o Moo, AIR 1963 P& H 114

11.

Harbhajan Singh Monga vs. Amarjeet Kaur, AIR 1986 MP 41

12.

In State of Orissa v. Chandrika Mahapatra

WRITTEN AND SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT

Page 4

Ist NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION VIVEKANANDA LAW COLLEGE, PUTTUR

FACTS OF THE CASE For the sake of brevity and convenience of the honorable court the facts of the present case are summarized as follows:Factual Background 1. The appellant (Kamini) and respondent (Raja) both belong to the city of Kudala and the respondent (Raja) lived in the village of Kurupura on the outskirts of Kudala. The appellant and the respondent studied in the same engineering college and they knew each other. Parents of Kamini were in look out for a groom for their daughter. 2. While the parents of Kamini and Raja were on the lookout for an alliance, one happened to know the other and naturally there was exchange of proposal between the parents of Kamini and Raja. 3. Kamini agreed to the proposal. Thus, the marriage was fixed it took place in the month of January, 2010. 4. After marriage, as usual, kamini went to live with her husband in their house. On the first night, after kamini began to live in her husband’s house, she observed that raja took some pills and soon thereafter went to sleep without any word of talk with Kamini. 5. Uma, kamini’s mother in law told that Raja would sometimes sleep for even a day and not to worry. 6. Somehow Kamini managed the day, though Raja was fast asleep all the while and his parents also did not bother to wake him up. Later by evening, Raja woke up and without so much bothering about Kamini he ate food which his mother gave him. 7. Kamini found something strange in his behaviour and when she enquired if he is not well or something, Raja did not answer her but ignored her. Another night also went by same repetition. 8. Next day Kamini summoned courage and asked her mother in law what is wrong with Raja and why he takes pills. Wrong with Raja and why he takes pills and sleeps. At this query, Uma became furious and told Kamini not to ask too many question so early after marriage.

WRITTEN AND SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT

Page 5

Ist NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION VIVEKANANDA LAW COLLEGE, PUTTUR

9. Raja that once in a way he would become nervous and on such occasions he would take medicine to get full rest and then he would be alright. Kamini ‘s expectation with husband did not happen. 10. After few days of living together in this kind of uncertainty Kamini took courage and asked Raja why he was not showing any affection towards Kamini. Then he broke down and mentioned to her that he was afraid to make amorous advances to Kamini. 11. Raja and Kamini decided to meet a doctor who can treat the problem. Accordingly Raja and Kamini went to city of Kudala and sought advice from the well known psychiatrist, Dr. Prema. 12. While narrating history Raja mentioned that he was getting treated by Dr. Ananth, another psychiatrist since few years after he entered Engineering college. The drugs mentioned by him as prescribed by Dr Ananth indicated that it was treatment for schizophrenia. 13. Dr Prema suggested remedial measures and prescribed some medicine and asked to visit again after three days. However, during the said three days also with the medicine taken, Raja would not perform his marital duty to Kamini. 14. Kamni confronted her parents in law regarding the previous medication of Raja. Instead of explaining they flew into rage and started abusing Kamini without rhyme or reason. Raja who was sitting away suddenly came on Kamini and started beating her mercilessly and unmindful of where he was hitting her. Kamini yelled in pain and surprise at the sudden turn of events which she had not visualized. 15. All of a sudden Raja stopped beating and straight went to store room and there he consumed Baygon spray which was kept as handy pesticide. This led to big commotion. Immediately Raja was taken to hospital by his father. Kamini found that it was end of her day to stay in that house and she packed her things inspite from her parents in law she decided and accordingly returned to her parents who were shocked beyond relief. 16. All these events happened within such short span of a month’s time in her married life, thereby totally shattering her. 17. Finally Kamini and her parents decided to put an end to the marriage. Accordingly they consulted an able advocate of Kudala and in the first instance issued a legal notice and when there was no response to it, filed the divorce petition against Raja in the Family

WRITTEN AND SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT

Page 6

Ist NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION VIVEKANANDA LAW COLLEGE, PUTTUR

Court at Kudala. Raja was treated in the hospital after he had consumed Baygon and was cured. 18. Kamini urged that it was an arranged marriage according to Hindu Marriage Act, that the previous chronic mental illness of Raja had been suppressed during the marriage proposal, that Raja was suffering from incurable mental illness and in particular schizophrenia, with suicidal tendency, and it would be not possible to live with him as wife for the rest of the life and that he was impotent, that the marriage was not consummated and Raja was incapable to consummate also and he and his parents also treated Kamini with mental and physical cruelty and as such it will be great hardship for her to continue the marital status any longer and as such divorce should be granted to her marriage with Raja. 19. Raja urged that during college days Kamini and Raja knew each other well and there was no suppression of fact and that the marriage was done in the hope that Raja would be able to get over his illness once he has a companion for life and only after understanding this the marriage was fixed. Raja generally denied the assertions of Kamini in her petition and contended that his illness is curable and if companion of life cooperates he would get well soon. Raja denied that he was impotent or that he beat Kamini or that he consumed poison. 20. He contended that the petition of divorce was premature. In the course of proceedings in the Family Court Kamini got summons medical evidence about past treatment of Raja for schizophrenia for several years. 21. She examined Dr.Prema to prove about the impotency and schizophrenia treated by her. As regards records produced from Dr Ananth’s clinic evidence was given to prove handwriting and signature of Dr.Ananth because by this time he was no more. 22. She also filed an application to make Raja available for physical examination before a panel of doctors to be appointed as commissioners and to give report about this impotency and mental illness as incurable in nature. This was opposed by Raja and the Court rejected the application. 23. Kamini gave evidence narrating all that happened to her after marriage and also that illness of Raja was not known when proposal of marriage was talked about. Kamini

WRITTEN AND SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT

Page 7

Ist NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION VIVEKANANDA LAW COLLEGE, PUTTUR

denied any acquaintance with Raja during college days except knowing that he was studying in the same college.

24. Kamini withstood cross examination by lawyer of Raja. Kamini summoned the domestic servant who had witnessed the beating of Kamini by Raja and his later consumption of Baygon. Medical evidence was also produced to show that he was treated for so attempting to commit suicide.

25. Raja did not turn up for cross reexamination though gave several opportunities to come to the court.

26. Finally his evidence in chief examination remained incomplete. Court treated the evidence as incomplete and closed the case. Court heard arguments of advocates of both sides. The trial court rejected the divorce petition holding that impotency is not proved by medical evidence and that his illness was not shown to be incurable.

27. Trial court held that there was no sufficient proof of cruelty to order divorce. The whole process of the case took about five years’ time to conclude. Kamini was constrained to file appeal to High Court of Karnataka.

WRITTEN AND SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT

Page 8

Ist NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION VIVEKANANDA LAW COLLEGE, PUTTUR

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION The appellant humbly submits that this Honorable High Court of Karnataka has the jurisdiction under Art. 227 of India Constitution of India, coupled with section 100(1) of Civil Procedure Code 1908.

WRITTEN AND SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT

Page 9

Ist NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION VIVEKANANDA LAW COLLEGE, PUTTUR

STATEMENT OF ISSUES I WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT HAS CORRECTLY APPRECIATED THE FACTS PLEADED AND EVIDENCES ON RECORD WHILE DISMISSING THE DIVORCE PETITION OF THE APPELLANT? II WHETHER A MATRIMONIAL COURT HAS A POWER TO DIRECT A PARTY TO UNDERGO MEDICAL EXAMINATION? WHETHER PASSING SUCH ORDER IS A VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA? III WHETHER THE RESPONDENT TREATED THE APPELLANT WITH CRUELTY AS ALLEGED IN THE APPEAL AND IF SO WITH WHAT EFFECT? IV WHETHER THE APPELLANT IS ENTITLE TO OBTAIN THE RELIEF OF DIVORCE OR NOT?

WRITTEN AND SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT

Page 10

Ist NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION VIVEKANANDA LAW COLLEGE, PUTTUR

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS I. WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT HAS CORRECTLY APPRECIATED THE FACTS PLEADED AND EVIDENCES ON RECORD WHILE DISMISSING THE DIVORCE PETITION OF THE APPELLANT? The Trial Court has failed to provide proper explanation why it has dismissed the divorce petition even after bringing valuable evidences on record by the appellant. II. WHETHER A MATRIMONIAL COURT HAS A POWER TO DIRECT A PARTY TO UNDERGO MEDICAL EXAMINATION? WHETHER PASSING SUCH ORDER IS A VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA? Yes the matrimonial court has the power to direct a party to undergo medical examination because a sound mind indisputably is a key to a happy married life. (a) No passing such order is not a violation of Article 21 of Indian Constitution as stated in Sharda vs Dharmpal1

III. WHETHER THE RESPONDENT TREATED THE APPELLANT WITH CRUELTY AS ALLEGED IN THE APPEAL AND IF SO WITH WHAT EFFECT? The respondent has treated the appellant with cruelty as alleged in the appeal as the appellant suffered from mental cruelty because of following grounds: (a) Non consummation of marriage (b) Concealment of fact that respondent was suffering from schizophrenia (c) Impotency of respondent (d) Attempt to commit suicide

IV. WHETHER THE APPELLANT IS ENTITLE TO OBTAIN THE RELIEF OF DIVORCE OR NOT? Yes the appellant is entitled to obtain the relief of divorce under section 13(1) (1 a) of Hindu Marriage Act 1955. 1

Sharda vs Dharmpal ,AIR 2003 SC 3450

WRITTEN AND SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT

Page 11

Ist NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION VIVEKANANDA LAW COLLEGE, PUTTUR

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED ISSUE I WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT HAS CORRECTLY APPRECIATED THE FACTS PLEADED AND EVIDENCES ON RECORD WHILE DISMISSING THE DIVORCE PETITION OF THE APPELLANT? It is humbly submitted that the trial court had failed to correctly appreciate the facts pleaded and evidence brought on record by the appellant by not giving much of importance to the facts and evidences. The trial court has failed to consider the series of incidents that happened with the appellant. The following incidents were ignored as the confinement of fact regarding the mental health of the respondent, the fact was deliberately concealed and the consent for marriage was obtained by fraud. There was no consummation of marriage, non consummation of marriage which itself constitute mental cruelty to a married woman as stated by Honourable Supreme Court of India in case of Vinita Saxena vs Pankaj Pandit2. No importance was given to the incident with regard to an attempt to commit suicide made by the respondent, which is a clear indication of the ill mental health of the respondent. No importance was given to the incident with regard to an attempt to commit suicide made by the respondent, by consummation of baygon spray. Proper medical evidence was produced to show that the respondent was treated for so attempting to commit suicide. If he had been successful in his attempt to commit suicide, then one can see the consequences and the plight of the appellant because in the event the appellant would have been put immense difficulties, the poor appellant would get entangled into the clutches of law which virtually ruin her sanity, peace

2

Vinita Saxena v. Pankaj Pandit AIR 2006 SC 1662

WRITTEN AND SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT

Page 12

Ist NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION VIVEKANANDA LAW COLLEGE, PUTTUR

of mind and probably her entire life. The thought itself is distressing. Such a mental cruelty could not have been taken lightly by the Trial Court. No wife would ever be comfortable with or tolerate such an act by her husband to make an attempt to commit suicide. Only this one event was sufficient for the appellant wife to get a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty. This was stated by the Honourable Supreme Court of India in case of Narendra v.K Meena3 No consideration was given to the medical evidence regarding the mental health of the respondent. No fair chance was given to the appellant to prove respondent’s impotency as the application for the medical examination of the respondent was rejected. The Trial Court failed to consider the fact that the respondent denied the medical examination and didn’t turn up for the cross- examination. Instead of taking adverse action against the respondent the trial court treated the evidence as incomplete and closed the case. This clearly shows the trial courts insensitivity towards the matter by not considering the valuable facts pleaded and evidence brought on record. ISSUE II WHETHER A MATRIMONIAL COURT HAS A POWER TO DIRECT A PARTY TO UNDERGO MEDICAL EXAMINATION? WHETHER PASSING SUCH ORDER IS A VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA? It is humbly submitted before this honourable court that under Section 75(e) of Civil Procedure Code and order 26 rule 10A of the civil court has the requisite power to issue a direction to hold a scientific, technical or expert investigation. It is trite law that for the purpose of grant of a decree of divorce what is necessary is that the petitioner must establish that unsoundness of mind of the respondent is incurable or his/her mental disorder is of such a kind and to such an extent that he cannot reasonably be expected to live with his/her spouse. Medical testimony for arriving at such finding although may not be imperative but undoubtedly would be of considerable 3

AIR 2016 SC 4591 (2016)9SCC455

WRITTEN AND SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT

Page 13

Ist NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION VIVEKANANDA LAW COLLEGE, PUTTUR

assistance to the court. The Court is entitled to take the expert’s opinion in this behalf so as to enable it to satisfy itself as regard the existence of the conditions for grant of a decree for divorce. In BRB v. J.B4 it was held that “a judge of the High Court has the power to order a blood test whenever it is in the best interest of the child. The judges can be trusted to exercise this discretion wisely. The object of the court is to find out the truth. When scientific advances give fresh means of ascertaining it, there should be no hesitation to use those means whenever the occasion requires. In all such matrimonial cases where divorce is sought, say on the ground of impotency, schizophrenia...etc. normally without there being medical examination, it would be difficult to arrive at a conclusion as to whether the allegation made by his spouse against the other spouses seeking divorce on such a ground, is correct or not. If respondent avoids such medical examination on the ground that it violates his/her right to privacy or for a matter right to personal liberty as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, then it may in most of such cases become impossible to arrive at a conclusion. It may render the very grounds on which divorce is permissible nugatory. The exposure to medical examination aided by scientific data would not infringe the right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Assuming that the fundamental rights explicitly guaranteed to a citizen have penumbral zones and that the right to privacy is itself a fundamental right that fundamental right must be subject to restriction on the basis of compelling public interest." (Para 31) If there were a conflict between fundamental rights of two parties, that right which advances public morality would prevail 5. Thus it is the duties of the court to reconcile between these competing interests by balancing the interests involved. In Smt Ningamma v. Chikkaiah6 it has been said that the means resorted to for proof on these occasions are offensive to natural modesty, but nature has provided no other means, and we must

4

BRB v. JB, (1968) 2AII.ER 1023 Mr. 'X' v. Hospital 'Z' (1998) 8 SCC 296 6 Smt Ningamma v. Chikkaiah LQ 1999 HC 10003 5

WRITTEN AND SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT

Page 14

Ist NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION VIVEKANANDA LAW COLLEGE, PUTTUR

be under the necessity of saying that all relief shall be denied or of applying the means within our power. The court must not sacrifice justice to notions of delicacy of its own. Therefore it can be concluded that the implicit power of a court to direct medical examination of a party to a matrimonial litigation in a case of this nature cannot be held to be violative of one's right of privacy. ISSUE III WHETHER THE RESPONDENT TREATED THE APPELLANT WITH CRUELTY AS ALLEGED IN THE APPEAL AND IF SO WITH WHAT EFFECT?

1. It is humbly submitted to this Honorable Court that the actions of respondent do amounts to Mental Cruelty. According to the Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act 1955 which defines the grounds for divorce which is available to both the parties to the marriage and one of the grounds available to both parties to a marriage is ‘cruelty’. That is the ground on which the appellant herein, the wife, had filed an application for a decree of divorce.

2. Section 13(1)(1-a) specifically states that:(1) Any marriage solemnized, whether before or after the commencement of this Act, may, on a petition presented by either the husband or the wife, be dissolved by a decree of divorce on the ground that the other party(i-a) has, after the solemnization of the marriage, treated the petitioner with cruelty.

3. The term ‘Cruelty’ constitutes both acts of Physical and Mental cruelty. Even though the act doesn’t define mental cruelty as such, the Apex court has in ample verdicts defined and established the grounds for mental cruelty.

4. In Bhagat v Bhagat7, the Honorable Supreme Court defined Mental Cruelty as "that conduct which inflicts upon the other party such mental pain and suffering as would make it not possible for that party to live with the other. In other words, mental cruelty must be of such a nature that the parties cannot reasonably be expected to live together. ”

7

V. Bhagat v. D. Bhagat, AIR 1994 SC 710

WRITTEN AND SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT

Page 15

Ist NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION VIVEKANANDA LAW COLLEGE, PUTTUR

5. The respondent has treated the appellant with both physical and mental cruelty. The conduct of the respondent is the evidence of the cruelty that the appellant suffered. The conduct of the appellant is grave and weighty and it is something more than ordinary wear and tear of married life. The Trial Court, being the first door to justice overlooked the most important factors presented by the appellant i.e.

a. Non-consummation of marriage- Marriage without consummation is an anathema. Sex is the foundation of marriage and without a harmonious sexual activity it would be impossible for any marriage to continue for long. It must be recognized that nothing is more fatal to marriage than disappointment in sexual intercourse. Non consummation of marriage itself amounts to mental cruelty which affects mental health of the appellant and furnishes a ground for dissolution of marriage as established in the case of Avinash Prasad Srivastava vs. Smt. Chandra Mohini8 It is one of the essential and principal obligations on the part of respondent to satisfy the biological urge of appellant which is natural instinct. The marriage was never consummated in spite of appellant’s efforts because of complete lack of warmth and response from the respondent. The appellant was deprived of the basic nuptial bliss. This amounts to cruelty as said by Lord Denning in Kalest Sky v. Kalest Sky9 “Thus willful and unjustifiable refusal of sexual intercourse is destructive of marriage, more destructive, perhaps, than anything else. Just as normal sexual intercourse is the normal bond of marriage, so the willful refusal of its causes a marriage to disintegrate. It gives rise to irritability and discord, to nervousness and manifestations of temper, and hence to the breakdown of marriage”.

b. Concealment of fact: - Trust in a relationship is a must. Trust is extremely vital for a marriage to thrive and be fulfilling. It’s also the most important thing that makes pursuing any relationship worthwhile. Trust provides the means to add brick after brick to the foundation of your relationship. In the preset case the appellant was kept in the dark about the true mental condition of respondent and she came to know it only after her marriage. The fact that the respondent was suffering from mental disorder was suppressed by the respondent which results is matrimonial fraud. 8

9

Avinash Prasad Srivastava vs. Smt. Chandra Mohini AIR 1964 All 486 Kalest Sky v. Kalest Sky 1950 (2) All.ER 398

WRITTEN AND SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT

Page 16

Ist NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION VIVEKANANDA LAW COLLEGE, PUTTUR

In Parveen Mehta vs Inderjeet Mehta10 "Non-disclosure and concealment of wife’s mental health constitutes mental cruelty and the husband was entitled to a decree of divorce.”

c. Impotency of respondent:- In Jagdish Kumar S/o Tilak Raj vs. Smt. Sita Devi D/o Moo11 the term 'impotent' has been described in Halsbury's Laws of England, Volume 12, at page 228, to be such a state of mental or physical condition which makes consummation of the marriage a practical

impossibility. In Corpus Juris Secundum,

Volume 42, at page 410, it is stated that the term 'impotent' has been held synonymous with "incapacity for copulation, or sexual intercourse.” In other words, the incapacity for sexual intercourse is a clear indication of impotency. Impotency is not only a ground which result in non-consummation of marriage but due to it one spouse is unable to discharge his or her matrimonial obligation and it would amount to mental cruelty as stated in Avinash Prasad Srivastava… vs. Smt. Chandra Mohini 12.

d. Attempt to commit suicide: - When a person voluntarily do an act for the purpose of destroying his own life, being conscious of that probable consequence, and having, at the time, is said to commit suicide. Emphases here are on the words ‘voluntary act’ and ‘being conscious of that consequence.’ This means intention is the essential ingredient. In the present case appellant would never be comfortable with or tolerate such an act by her husband. The conduct of respondent ruins appellant sanity, peace of mind, career and probably her entire life. The mere idea with regard to facing legal consequences would put a wife under tremendous stress. The thought itself is distressing. Such a mental cruelty could not have been taken lightly. Only this one event was sufficient for the Appellant husband to get a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty stated in .This was stated by the Honourable Supreme Court of India in case of Narendra v.K Meena13

10

Parveen Mehta vs Inderjeet Mehta 2002(5) SCC 706 Jagdish Kumar S/o Tilak Raj vs. Smt. Sita Devi D/o Moo AIR 1963 P& H 114 12 Ibid 8 13 Supra note 3 11

WRITTEN AND SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT

Page 17

Ist NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION VIVEKANANDA LAW COLLEGE, PUTTUR

ISSUE IV WHETHER THE APPELLANT IS ENTITLE TO OBTAIN THE RELIEF OF DIVORCE OR NOT? 1. It is humbly submitted that the appellant is entitled to obtain a decree of divorce because right from the beginning, the appellant has established grounds under section 13(1) (1 a) of Hindu Marriage Act 1955 with substantive evidences. 2. The Trial Court failed to appreciate the uncontroverted evidence of the appellant who had proved the case on every count. It has been established beyond doubt by the Medical evidences that the respondent is suffering from mental disorder. Further ground for granting divorce on the plea of mental insanity/mental disorder is different than cruelty. The appellant had proved beyond doubt that the respondent suffered from mental disorder and that the appellant suffered cruelty by and at the behest of the respondent. The appellant had also given specific instances of cruelty which clearly establish that the appellant had a reasonable apprehension that it will be harmful or injurious for her if she continues to live with the respondent husband. 3. It is settled by catena of decisions that mental cruelty can cause even more serious injury than the physical harm and create in the mind of the injured appellant such apprehension as is contemplated in the Section 13 (1) (1-a) of Hindu Marriage Act 1955. 4. To amount cruelty, there must be such willful treatment of the party which caused suffering in body or mind. . The word ’cruelty’ has not been defined and it has been used in relation to human conduct or human behavior. 5. Section 13(1) (iii) ’mental disorder’ as a ground of divorce is only where it is of such a kind and degree that the appellant cannot reasonably be expected to live with the respondent. In the present case mental disorder is of such a type that sexual act and procreation of children is not possible it may furnish a good ground for dissolution of marriage because to beget children from a Hindu wedlock is one of the principal aims of Hindu Marriage where sanskar of marriage is advised for progeny and offspring. Moreover the respondent refused to submit himself for medical examination and go before the medical Board. This confirms that the respondent is suffering from Schizophrenia.

WRITTEN AND SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT

Page 18

Ist NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION VIVEKANANDA LAW COLLEGE, PUTTUR

6. In the case of Harbhajan Singh Monga vs. Amarjeet Kaur14, it has been held that “attempt to commit suicide by one spouse has been found to amount to cruelty to other.” 7. The mental condition of respondent is of such kind that appellant can’t live with him. Since the matter has been brought to this court, it would be proper to observe for the purpose of the present case that respondent is suffering from schizophrenia and his mental disorder, though inter mitten, has been of such kind and to such an extent that appellant cannot reasonably expected to live with respondent. 8. The acts of the respondent are so serious in nature. They do constitute mental cruelty. They are more than trivial irritations, normal wear and tear of the marital life and do amount to mental cruelty. 9. In State of Orissa v. Chandrika Mahapatra15, the Supreme Court has held that “paramount consideration must be the interest of administration of justice. No hard and fast rule can be laid down nor can any categories of cases be defined in which consent should be granted or refused. It must ultimately depend on the facts and circumstances of each case in the light of what is necessary in order to promote the ends of justice, because the objective of every judicial process must be the attainment of justice.” Hence, it is most humbly submitted before this honorable court that the actions of the respondent considered separately or cumulatively, do amount to mental cruelty and hence divorce shall be granted on the same grounds. Thus it is requested to accept the prayer of the appellant and allow this appeal.

14

Harbhajan Singh Monga vs. Amarjeet Kaur AIR 1986 MP 41 State of Orissa v. Chandrika Mahapatra AIR 1977 SC 903

15

WRITTEN AND SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT

Page 19

Ist NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION VIVEKANANDA LAW COLLEGE, PUTTUR

PRAYER Wherefore in the light of facts presented, issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited, the Counsels on behalf of the Appellant humbly pray before this Honorable Court that it may be pleased to:

Accept the appellant’s prayer for divorce under Section 13(1) (1-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 and set aside the judgment passed by the Trial Court of Kudala.

Or pass any other order that the court may deem fit in the light of equity, justice and good conscience and for this Act of kindness of Your Lordships the Appellant shall as duty bound ever pray.

WRITTEN AND SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT

Page 20