AIR 2002 SUPREME COURT 576 ::2002 AIR SCW 162 ::(2002) 1 MarriLJ 317 ::2002 (1) Marr LJ 317 ::(2002) WLC(SC)CVL 153 ::2002 (1) UJ (SC) 583 ::2002 UJ(SC) 1 583 ::(2003) ILR (Kant) (4) 3925 ::(2002) 2 CivLJ 680 ::(2002) 1 CivilCourtC 560 ::2002 (2) SCC 296 ::2002 (2) RecCivR 15 ::(2002) 1 Scale 111 ::2002 (2) All CJ 917 ::2002 (1) CurCC 68 ::(2002) 1 AllMR 953 (SC) ::2002 (1) All MR 953 ::2002 (46) All LR 383 ::2002 (2) Cal HN 172 ::2002 (4) Bom CR 263 ::2002 (2) BLJ 100 ::(2002) 1 All WC 509 ::2002 (1) BLJR 503 ::2002 BLJR 1 503 ::(2002) 1 DMC 266 ::2002 (3) GujLH 635 ::(2002) MatLR 294 ::2002 (22) OCR 692 ::2002 (1) MadLJ194 ::(2002) 1 JCR 478 (SC) ::2002 (1) RajLW 167 ::(2002) 1 Pun LR 568 ::(2002) 1 SCJ 245 ::2002 (1) LRI 337 ::(2002) 1 UC 338 ::2002 (1) Supreme 123 ::2002 (1) SLT 153 ::2002 (4) Andh LD 84 ::2002 (2) SRJ 467 ::(2002) 1 JT 89 (SC)

Supreme Court Of India

(From : Andhra Pradesh)*

Hon'ble Judge(s): D. P. Mohapatra, K. G. Balakrishnan , JJ

(A) Hindu Marriage Act (25 of 1955) , S.13(1)(ia)— Divorce - Cruelty - Need not be of such nature as causing reasonable apprehension that it would be harmful for petitioner to live with other party - Act committed with intention to cause suffering to other party - Is cruelty - Social status of parties is relevant consideration - Cruelty cannot be judged from solitary incident. It is not necessary to prove that the nature of the cruelty is such as to cause reasonable apprehension in the mind of the petitioner that it would be harmful for the petitioner to live with the other party. English Courts in some of the earlier decisions had attempted to define 'cruelty' as an act which involves conduct of such a nature as to have caused damage to life, limb or health or to give rise to reasonable apprehension of such danger. But such a degree of cruelty is not required to be proved by the petitioner for obtaining a decree for divorce. Cruelty can be said to be an act committed with the intention to cause suffering to the opposite party. Austerity of temper, rudeness of language, occasional outburst of anger, may not amount to cruelty, though it may amount to misconduct. The Court has to come to a conclusion whether the acts committed by the counter-petitioner amount to cruelty, and it is to be assessed having regard to the status of the parties in soc....