TEAM CODE 09

IN THE JUDICATURE OF HON’BLE DELHI HIGH COURT

APPEAL NO……….OF 2018

IN THE MATTER OF:

MS.RITU …..APPELLANT
V.

MR.SUSHIL …….RESPONDENT

BEFORE THE HON’BLE DELHI HIGH COURT

APPEAL BY SEC.28 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT ,1955

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

S PARTICULAR PAGE NO.

NO.
1 LIST OF ABBREVIATION 3

2 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES 4

3 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION 10
4 STATEMENT OF FACT 11

5 STATEMENT OF ISSUES 14

6 ARGUMENT ADVANCED

ISSUE -1
WHETHER THE FAMILY COURT HAD
MADE AN EX –PARTE DECISION OR NOT 16
IN SEC. 13 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT
1955?
ISSUE-2
WHETHER THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE
RESPONDENT’S MOTHER WAS MENTAL
CRUELTY WITH THE APPELLANT WHICH
COMPELLED HER TO LEAVE HER 26
MATERIMONIAL HOME ON 18TH NOV,
2013?

ISSUE -3
 WHETHER SUSHIL REMARRIAGE IS
VALID OR NOT?

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

S. ABBREVIA FULL FORM

N TIONS
O
1 HMA HINDU MARRIAGE ACT
2 HON’BLE HONOURABLE
3 SEC SECTION
4 AIR ALL INDIA REPORT
5 CPC CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE
6 IPC INDIAN PENAL CODE
7 V. VERSUS

8 SCC SUPREME COURT CASE

9 HC HIGH COURT

10 & AND

11 ED EDITION

12 U UNDER SECTION
/S
N NUMBER
13 O.
L LIMITED
14 TD
R
 15 CR

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

BOOKS REFERRED

S.NO BOOK NAME

JUSTICE V.N.KHARE, KD GAUR INDIAN PENAL CODE (7 TH ED.

UNIVERSAL LAW PUBLISHING CO. PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI 2021
)

PROF. KUSUM , FAMILY LAW LECTURES (4TH ED ., 2016 )

B.M GANDHI , FAMILY LAW (VOLUME 1) 2012

.
STATUTES REFERRED

S.NO NAME OF STATUTES

1. HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955

2. CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908

3. LIMITATION ACT, 1963

4. INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1980

 WEBSITE REFERRED

S.NO NAME OF THE WEBSITE

1 www.ssconline.com
2 www.indiankanoon.com
3 www.casemine.com

WEBLINK REFERRED

S.NO NAME OF THE WEBLINK

1 https://indiankanoon.org/docfragment/1554443/?formInput=ex
%20parte%20judgment

2 https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/administrative-law/passing-of-the-ex-
parte-decree-administrative-law-essay.php

3 https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2018/12/03/law-for-laymen-section-
498-a-ipc-and-allied-sections-cruelty-to-women
4 https://blog.ipleaders.in/desertion-ground-divorce/
 CASES REFERRED

S.NO CASE NAME PAGE

NO.
1 NARESH CHANDRA AGARWAL V. 21
BANK OF BARODA 2001 3 SCC 163
2 SALEEM ADVOCATE BAR 21
ASSOCIATION V. UOI 2005 6 SCC 344
3 KAKI V. AJIT SINGH , AIR 1960 PINJ 23
328
4 SAVITRI PANDEY V. PREM CHANDRA 23
PANDEY (2002) SCC 20-21
5 V. BHAGAT V. D. BHAGAT 1994. 1 SCC 24
337
6 V. SERVETHE V. STATE BY 26
INSPECTOR OF POLICE
7 G. V. SIDHURAMESH V . STATE OF 26
KARNATKA 2010 3 SCC 152
 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The appellant approaches the hon’ble Delhi High Court under Sec. 28 of
HMA, 1955 which deals with appeals from decrees and orders.1

1
Sec 28 in HMA, 1955
59
[ 28 Appeals from decrees and orders. —
(1) All decrees made by the court in any proceeding under this Act shall,
subject to the provisions of sub-section (3), be appealable as decrees of
the court made in the exercise of its original civil jurisdiction, and every
such appeal shall lie to the court to which appeals ordinarily lie from the
decisions of the court given in exercise of its original civil jurisdiction.
(2) Orders made by the court in any proceeding under this Act under
section 25 or section 26 shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section
(3), be appealable if they are not interim orders, and every such appeal
shall lie to the court to which appeals ordinarily lie from the decisions of
the court given in exercise of its original civil jurisdiction.
(3) There shall be no appeal under this section on the subject of costs
only.
 STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. The Respondent (Sushil) and the Appellant ( Ritu) married each other
on 15th January, 2011 acc to Hindu rituals. Thereafter they resided in
the matrimonial home at Karol Bagh, Delhi along with the parents of
the respondent. The Respondent’s mother was a woman who believed
in mythology and was having very orthodox approach towards life.
She always wanted that her son to have a son for sacramental reasons.
Due to her persistent insistence the couple had to unwillingly
conceive a child which they always wanted to be done after
sometime. The Appellant went to her parent’s place for the delivery
of the child as per the instructions of her mother-in-law who believed
that the first child should be delivered at her parent’s place.
2. The Appellant delivered a baby girl on 15th July 2012 due to which
there arose a lot of differences between the Appellant and her mother-
in-law. The Respondent’s mother continuously passed insulting
remarks upon the Appellant for the baby girl as she always wanted a
grandson. She also threatened her that if she will not bear a boy for
their family, she will remarry her son to another girl. The Respondent
also used to fight with his own mother that he is satisfied with the
birth of the girl.
3. The Appellant started persuading her husband to leave his parents and
start living separately, to which, the Respondent never agreed. He
was adamant to stay with his parents. It led to a lot of arguments and
disputes between the couple and the Respondent started drinking and
abusing the Appellant at times. Their relationship started taking an
ugly turn. The Appellant started refusing for sexual intercourse with
the Respondent and also started ignoring the household chores and his
parents. On the other hand, the Respondent started coming late from
 office and their family life was shattered. The Appellant was
disappointed with the events taking place and one day she again
requested the Respondent to move to another house in order to
improve their relationship, to which the Respondent bluntly refused .
The Appellant, frustrated with the constant nagging of her mother-in-
law and inability of her husband to change the residence, decided to
leave the matrimonial house along with her minor daughter and
consequently returned to her parent’s house on 18th October 2013.
4. On 10 January 2014, the Respondent visited the appellant’s parent’s
house but he never found her there. The Respondent kept on visiting
his in-laws house but because of the mental pressure by her parents,
the Appellant was never allowed to meet the Respondent. He tried to
communicate through phone also but all in vain.
5. Then finally on 24 July 2014, he filed a petition under Section 9, of
the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for the Restitution of Conjugal Rights
to save his marriage. Finally, on 23rd January 2015, Court passed the
decree of Restitution of Conjugal Rights under Section 9, according
to which the Appellant was supposed to resume her matrimonial
home, but she did not turn up even after decree of Restitution of
Conjugal Rights. The Respondent then filed an execution of above
said decree. Summonses were issued to the Appellant at the given
address but the same were returned and marked as “refused to accept”
6. That having left with no other alternative remedy the Respondent then
on 15th March, 2016 filed a petition for Divorce under section 13 of
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. It was considered as a constructive notice
by the Family Court and the Family Court proceeded with the matter.
7. The petition was heard ex-parte and on the basis of the evidence
produced by the Respondent, the Family Court granted divorce to the
husband on 26th September, 2016. The Copy of the order was sent to
the Appellant by the Respondent on the address provided.
8. On 25th March, 2017, the Respondent remarried Kirti, a Hindu
Woman. Kirti conceived the Respondent’s child and the due date for
delivery was 18th May, 2018.
9. Meanwhile, the Appellant filed an application on 5th October, 2018,
before the Delhi High Court for condonation of delay for filing appeal
against the decree of the Family Court granting ex-parte decree to the
Respondent, stating that, she was unaware of the proceedings, as the
summons were served on the address where she was not residing. She
also stated that her parents moved to a new house and accordingly she
also went along with them in the house and claimed that the
Respondent was very well aware of her new address and he
intentionally did not serve her on her new address. She came to know
about all the above said development through some common friend.
10. She also stated that she never had the intention to desert the
Respondent, but, she only wanted to teach a lesson to her mother-in-
law and for the said purpose, she had taken the Respondent into
confidence. She argued that she was deeply hurt by the constant
taunts /remarks by the Respondent’s mother and consequent
arguments with the Respondent also but never desired to severe the
matrimonial bond. After due consideration of the reasons for delay in
filing the appeal, the court condoned the delay and accepted the
application for appeal.
11. The case is now before the appellate court.
 STATEMENT OF ISSUES

THE RESPONDENT RESPECTFULLY ASKS THE HON’BLE

SUPREME COURT THE FOLLOWING QUESTION:

ISSUE-1
WHETHER THE FAMILY COURT HAD MADE AN EX –PARTE
DECISION OR NOT IN SEC. 13 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT,
1955?

ISSUE-2
WHETHER THE BEHAVIOUR Of THE REPONDENT’S MOTHER

WAS MENTAL CRUELTY WITH THE APPELLANT WHICH

COMPELLED HER TO LEAVE HER MATERIMONIAL HOME
ON 18TH NOV, 2013?
 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

ISSUE – 1
Whether the family court had made an ex -parte decision or not in sec. 13 of
Hindu marriage act 1955?
It is submitted that all the necessary essentials to prove verdict of family court are
ex-parte viz...
She was unaware of proceedings.
Summons were served on the wrong address.
She was not connected to any of her common friends for a year as she was
going through a trauma.
She had no intention to desert Sushil.

ISSUE -2
Whether the behavior of the respondent’s mother was mental cruelty with
the Appellant which compelled her to leave her matrimonial home 18th
Nov, 2013?
Under Sec 498A of IPC, mother in law of the appellant mentally
harassed her by constantly abusing and taunting her because she gave
birth to a girl child.
Before marriage of the appellant and respondent, the mother-in-law
was nice with her. But after the marriage, she showed her true colour.
Due to her persistent insistence the couple had to unwillingly
conceive a child which they always wanted to be done after
sometime.
 ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

ISSUE – 1

Whether the family court had made an ex -parte decision or not in sec. 13 of
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955?

It is humbly submitted that, all the necessary essentials to prove verdict

of family court are ex-parte viz..
EX PARTE:-
An ‘Ex parte decree’ is a decree passed against a defendant in
absentia. Despite service of summons, where on the date of hearing
only plaintiff does and a defendant does not appear the Court may hear
the suit ex parte and pass a decree against the defendant. The article
critically analyses various provisions in the CPC, 1908 pertaining to ex
parte decree. Part I of the article enumerates the nature and cause of an
ex parte decree. Part II titled Relief Available Against an ex parte deals
with various remedies available to the person against whom an ex parte
decree is passed and the abuse of such remedies. Part III titled
Sufficient Cause for Non-appearance analyses various instances and
circumstances where non-appearance of the party is excusable. Part IV
titled Ex Parte Decree obtained by Fraud deals extensively with one of
the remedy available against an ex parte decree.2
M/S Meenakshisundaram Textiles vs M/S Valliammal Textiles
They should be extra careful in such case and it should consider the
pleadings and evidence and arrive at a finding as to whether the plaintiff
has made out a case for a decree. In this context, it may also be
mentioned that though a detailed judgment is required in a contested
matter, an ex parte judgment should show the application of the
minimum requirement of consideration of the pleadings, issues,
evidence and the relief sought for rendering such judgment Ltd 3on 7
March, 2011, in this case held that, it is manifestly clear that even a
judgment rendered ex parte and a decree is drawn on the basis of that
judgment, it is appealable. In case that judgment and decree become
final without there being any appeal, the decree is executable. In that
sense, there is no difference between a judgment and decree and an ex
parte judgment and decree.
In view of the above, in the event the defendant is set ex parte, the Court
should be extra careful in such case and it should consider the pleadings
and evidence and arrive at a finding as to whether the plaintiff has made
out a case for a decree. In this context, it may also be mentioned that
though a detailed judgment is required in a contested matter, an ex parte
judgment should show the application of the minimum requirement of
consideration of the pleadings, issues, evidence and the relief sought for
rendering such judgment.

2
https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/administrative-law/passing-of-the-ex-parte-decree-
administrative-law-essay.php
3
https://indiankanoon.org/docfragment/1554443/?formInput=ex%20parte%20judgment
[A] UNAWARE ABOUT PROCEEDINGS:-

According to Order 9, Rule 13, C.P.C. provides for setting aside an ex

parte decree against a defendant if he satisfies the court that he was
prevented by any sufficient cause from appearing when the suit was
called on for hearing. In case of the appellant, they have sufficient cause
from not appearing in proceedings:-
Appellant was unaware about the proceedings as the respondent
and his mother intentionally give false address to the hon’ble
Family court so that the appellant doesn’t get any knowledge of the
proceedings.

Respondent’s mother is a woman who believes in mythology and

has very orthodox approach towards life. She only wants a
grandson and after the appellant gave birth to a girl child on 15 th
July, 2012, she refused to accept the child as her granddaughter.
Also, they abused and passed taunting comments and did not
treated them (appellant and her daughter) well. Also, she aroused
the respondent against the appellant and her baby and constantly
asked him to remarry. The respondent started abusing the appellant
and this compelled her to leave the house on 18th October, 2013.

After all this, the appellant went into trauma and disconnected
herself from everything. She reconnected herself after about an
year and then she got to know about the divorce and remarriage of
the respondent.
Condonation of Delay under Sec 5 of The Indian Limitation Act, 1963

Section 5[6] of the Limitation Act, 1963 deals with the extension of the
prescribed period in a certain case. It states that if the appellant or the
applicant satisfies the court that he had a sufficient cause for not
preferring the appeal or making the application within such period, then
such an application or appeal shall be admitted after the prescribed
period.4
In Ram Kali Kuer v. Indradeo Chaudhary, it was held that sec 5 does
not provide that an application in writing must be filed before relief
under the said provision can be granted.
In Ashok v. Rajendra Bhausaheb Mulak, it was held that a bona fide
mistake on the part of the counsel in pursuing a remedy is a good ground
for condonation of delay in approaching the right forum in the right kind
of proceedings.
Following are the instances when the delay can be condoned:
1. Subsequent changes in the law
2. Illness of the party
3. Party being a Pardanishin Lady
4. Imprisonment of a party
5. The party belongs to a minority group who has insufficient funds
4
Section 5 in The Limitation Act, 1963
5 Extension of prescribed period in certain cases. —Any appeal or any application, other than an application under
any of the provisions of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), may be admitted after the
prescribed period, if the appellant or the applicant satisfies the court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring
the appeal or making the application within such period. Explanation.— The fact that the appellant or the applicant
was misled by any order, practice or judgment of the High Court in ascertaining or computing the prescribed period
may be sufficient cause within the meaning of this section.
 6. Poverty or paupers
7. The delay is caused due to pendency of writ petition5
Here in sec 5 of limitation act state that if any one have a reasonable
excuse for delay in appeal that person appeal can be maintainable under
sec.5 of limitation actof1963 , that’s why ritu appeal is valid.

[B] SUMMONSES WERE SERVED ON THE WRONG ADDRESS:-

5
https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-3047-sufficient-cause-section-5-limitation-act-1963.html
After the plaint is filed, the summon is issued by the court to appear in
the court to defend it. The intimation which is sent to the other party
(defendant) is called summons. The provision related to summons are
given in Sec 27-32 and Order V of CPC.

Summons is an authoritative call from the court to attend the court at a

specified place and at a specified time. The summons as contemplated in
Rule 1 is for the attendance of the defendant. It says that once a plaint is
admitted the court is required to send the notice of such admission to the
defendant and then for the purpose of his appearance and to answer
(reply) the allegations made against him in the plaint. The summonses
are served on the defendant.
Section 27: Summons to Defendants 6
Section 27 of CPC stipulates that where a suit has been duly instituted
by filing a plaint, the first duty of the court is to issue summons calling
on the defendant to appear and answer the claim and such summons may
be served in a manner prescribed in the rules mentioned in Order V of
the first schedule and on such day not beyond 30 days from the date of
the institution of the suit.
Here in instant case, summons were not served to the appellant. That the
address which is given to the court is wrong and the respondent
intentionally did this in order to prevent the appellant from attending the
court pleadings.

6
27. Summons to defendants- where a suit has been duly instituted, a summons may be issued to the defendant to
appear and answer the claim and may be served in manner prescribed 2 [on such day not beyond thirty days from
date of the institution of the suit.]
 Order 5, Sec 27 of CPC states the issue of summon by court for giving
order to defendant to present in proceedings but the appellant failed to
attend the summons issued by family court7.
In Naresh Chandra Agarwal v. Bank of Baroda8, summons were not
severed to appellant, as in this case. And thereason stated that, the appeal
is allowed and the impugment judgment and trail are set aside.

(c) THE APPELLENT HAD NO INTENTION TO DESERT THE

RESPONDENT :-
7
Salem advocate bar asso. (ll) v. UOI (2005)6 scc 344
8
Naresh Chandra agarwal v. bank of baroda (2001) 3 scc 163
The word desert means to abandon , cease to frequent withdraw one’s
help or attendance. As per Sec 13(1)(ib) of HMA, desertion means the
desertion of petitioner without reasonable cause and without the consent
or againt the will of such party. 9
As expressed in Kako v. Ajit Singh, desertion means abondonment and
implies an action of withdrawal from a cohabitation conrary to the
will,or without the consent, of the other party.10
Desertion is not the withdrawal from a place, but from a state of things.
Halsbury’s Laws of India defines desertion as a ‘total repudiation of
the obligation of marriage. In a marriage, if one spouse leaves the
matrimonial alliance without any sufficient cause he is said to be at
‘fault’.11
Section 13(1) (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 deals with desertion
as a ground for divorce and the explanation of the same reads:
“The expression “desertion” means the desertion of the petitioner by the
other party to the marriage without reasonable cause and without the
consent of or against the wish of such party, and includes the willful
neglect of the petitioner by the other party to the marriage, and its
grammatical variations and cognate expressions shall be construed
accordingly”.12

‘Herein instant case , the appellent have a valid reason to leave the
respondent’s house because her mother-in-law mentally harassed her
and this is the reason why she wanted to live in a separate house because

9
Kako v. ajit singh , AIR 1960 punj 328
10
B.M.Gandhi ,volume-1 of FAMILY LAW 2012,pg. 178
11
https://blog.ipleaders.in/desertion-ground-divorce/
12
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/100581/
of her child’s protection. Respondent’s Mother wanted his son to
remarry and used to passed tauting comments to the appellant. In
addition to this, the respondent started drinking and abusing the
appellant. The appellant was scared for the safety of her child and thus,
she had enough valid reasons to leave the house.’
Incase of Savitri pandey v. prem chandra pandey, 13 it was said that
‘Desertion is not the withdrawal from a place but from a state of things.’
Desertion, therefore, means withdrawing from the matrimonial
obligations i.e not permitting or allowing and facilitating the
cohabitation between the parties.
In V. Bhagat v. D. Bhagat 14it was held that irretrievable breakdown of
the marriage is not a ground by itself to dissolve it.
In the case of Bipin Chander Jaisinghbhai Shah vs. Prabhawati, 1956
SCR 838, it is observed :-
The quality of permanence is one of the essential elements which
differentiates desertion from willful separation. If a spouse abandons the
other spouse in a state of temporary passion, for example, anger or
disgust, without intending permanently to cease cohabitation, it will not
amount to desertion.
For the offence of desertion, so far as the deserting spouse is concerned,
two essential conditions must be there, namely;
(1) the factum of separation, and
(2) the intention to bring cohabitation permanently to an end (animus
deserendi).

13
Savitri pandey v. prem chandra pandey (2002) scc 20-21
14
V. Bhagat v. D. Bhagat 1994 1 SCC 337
 Similarly two elements are essential so far as the deserted spouse is
concerned:
(1) the absence of consent, and
(2) absence of conduct giving reasonable cause to the spouse leaving
the matrimonial home to form the necessary intention aforesaid.
The petitioner for divorce bears the burden of proving those elements
in the two spouses respectively. Here a difference between the English
law and the law as enacted by the Bombay Legislature may be pointed
out. Whereas under the English law those essential conditions must
continue throughout the course of the three years immediately preceding
the institution of the suit for divorce, under the Act, the period is four
years without specifying that it should immediately precede the
commencement of proceedings for divorce. Whether the omission of the
last clause has any practical result need not detain us, as it does not call
for decision in the present case.
 ISSUE – 2

Whether the behavior of the respondent’s mother was mental cruelty with
the appellant which compelled her to leave her matrimonial home on
18thNovember,2013?

UNDER SEC. 498A OF IPC:-

A woman’s husband or her husband’s relative is subject to cruelty. –

Anyone who abuses a woman who is a relative of a husband can be
sentenced to three years in prison and also be liable to a fine.
Explanation.

For the purpose of this section, “cruelty” means-

(A) conduct of the husband or relatives compelling women for

committing suicide or causing serious injury or endangering a woman’s
life, organs or health (whether mental or physical); or

(B) Harassing woman in a place where she or a person related to her is

forcibly or any person related to her refuses to meet her in order to
satisfy any illegal demand for property or valuable security. Such a
demand.]15

15
[498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.—Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a
woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be
liable to fine. Explanation.—For the purpose of this section, “cruelty” means—
It was held in B.S. Josh v. State of Haryana, that the object of Sec 498-
A of IPC was to prevent torture to a woman by her husband or his
relatives in connection with demand of dowry. This section was added
with a view to punish a husband and his relatives who harass or torture
the wife to coerce her or her relatives to satisfy unlawful demands of
dowry. The hyper technical view would be counterproductive and would
act against interests of women and against the object for which this
provision was added. In the present case proceedings were initiated by
wife under Sec 498-A against her husband and his relatives and
subsequently she settled her disputes with husband and agreed for
mutual divorce. Later she moved an application for quashing
proceedings initiated by her against husband and his relatives.16

Cruelty can either be mental or physical. It is difficult to straitjacket the

term cruelty by means of a definition because cruelty is a relative term.
What constitutes cruelty for one person may not constitute cruelty for
another person, G.V. Siddaramesh v. State of Karnataka, (2010) 3
SCC 152.17
According to this Sec, the respondent’s mother committed and offence
under IPC. She mentally tortured the appellant by abusing and passing
taunting comments. The couple unwilling conceived the child in the
pressure of the mother-in-law. She also threatened her that she’ll
(a) any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb
or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or

(b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand
for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.]

16
KD Gaur , Textbook on IPC, Universal Law Publishing Co. (2021)7 th ed., pg 445
17
https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2018/12/03/law-for-laymen-section-498-a-ipc-and-allied-sections-cruelty-
to-women/
remarry his son to another women as the appellant conceived the girl
child. And hence, she was worried about the safety of her child. Because
of all of this, she went into trauma.

(b) MEANING OF RELATIVE:-

It was held in V. Seevethe v. State by inspector of police , that in the
absence of any statutory definition of the term “relatives” of husband ,
the term relative must be assigned a meaning as is commonly daughter ,
brother , sister , nephew , niece , grandson or grand , marriage or
adoption . By no stretch of imagination a girl be a ‘relative’. In relation
to cruelty to wife under sec 498-A of I.P.C , the world ‘cruelty’ having
been defined in terms of explanation appended to Sec 498-A , no other
meaning can be attributed thereto . Living with another woman may be
an act of cruelty on the part of the husband for the purpose attract the
wrath of sec 498-A.
Moreover sec 498-A being a penal provision ought to be given strict
construction. Therefore a girl friend or concubine of husband cannot be
charged under section 498A, IPC . In-laws could be good people-
accepting and loving.
However, when the issue turns to having a grandchild, they usually have
a pretty rigid stance. If one can’t think about being a parent don’t let a
mother-in-law who wants grandchildren force you down.
Before marriage of the appellant and respondent, the mother-in-law was
nice with her. But after the marriage, she showed her true colour. Due to
her persistent insistence the couple had to unwillingly conceive a child
which they always wanted to be done after sometime. She started
threatening and abusing the appellant.
 ISSUE -3

Whether Remarriage of sushil is valid or not?

Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act lays down conditions on when
divorced persons may remarry .The conditions specifically mentioned
are as follows:
1. When there is no right of appeal against the divorce decree or
2. ,If there is a right of appeal, the time for appealing has expired
without an appeal having been presented, or
3. An appeal has been presented18
Section 15 of the Act provides that it shall be lawful for either party to
marry again after dissolution of a marriage if there is no right of appeal
against the decree. A second marriage by either party shall be lawful
only after dismissal of an appeal against the decree of divorce, if filed. If
there is no right of appeal, the decree of divorce remains final and that
either party to the marriage is free to marry again.19
Restriction placedon a second marriage in sec 15 of the Act till
thedismissal ofan appeal wouldnot not apply to case whereparties
havesetttled and decided not to pursue have settled and decided not to
pursue the appeal. The SC has delivered an important judgement qua the

18
Section 15 in The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
Divorced persons when may marry again. —When a marriage has been dissolved by a decree of divorce and either
there is no right of appeal against the decree or, if there is such a right of appeal, the time for appealing has expired
without an appeal having been presented, or an appeal has been presented but has been dismissed, it shall be lawful
for either party to the marriage to marry again. 34 [***]
19
Mr. Anurag Mittal vs Mrs. Shaily Mishra Mittal on 24 August, 2018
provision in the Hindu Marriage Act which puts a condition on a divorce
in contracting a second marriage .20
High Court in view of the above held that during the pendency of the
appeal, the performance of second marriage would be a breach of
prohibition stipulated under Section 15 of the Act, 1955, but in any case,
it would not amount to disobedience of any command of the Court
consequently such act would not fall within the ambit of the expression
‘willful disobedience of other process of a Court’ under Clause (b) of
Section 2 of the Act, 1971.21

20
https://www.livelaw.in/restriction-for-remarriage-under-hindu-marriage-act-primarily-applicable-for-parties-contesting-the-decree-of-divorce-
sc-read-judgment/
21
https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2020/09/14/bom-hc-performing-second-marriage-during-pendency-of-an-appeal-is-a-breach-under-s-15-
of-hma-but-would-it-amount-to-civil-contempt-hc-analyses/
 PRAYER

WHEREFORE IN THE LIGHT OF THE FACTS OF THE INSTANT

CASE, ISSUES RAISED, ARGUMENTS ADVANCED, REASONS
GIVEN AND AUTHORITIES CITED, IT IS HUMBLY PRAYED
BEFORE THIS HON’BLE DELHI HIGH COURT THAT IT MAY BE
PLEASED:

TO PASS

 THAT THE EX PARTE DECREE OF FAMILY COURT

SHOULD NULL AND VOID
 RITU MOTHER IN LAW SHOULD CONVICTED UNDER
SEC. 498A OF IPC FOR MENTAL HARASSMENT
 REMARRIAGE OF SUSHIL SHOULD DECLARE IS NOT
VALID
 THAT APPEAL IS MAINTAINABLE

MISCELLANEOUS

ANY OTHER RELIEF THAT THE HON’BLE COURT MAY BE

PLEASED TO GRANT IN THE INTRESTS OF JUSTICE, EQUITY
AND GOOD CONSCIENCE

ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED

Sd/-
Counsels for the appellant