The world is getting a weirder place to live and the bizarre incidents that we stumble upon on a regular basis strengthen this fact. Fights between couples are quite common but things turn ugly when they take legal route to solve family disputes.
In a surprising incident, a man of 46 filed a petition for divorce as his wife didn’t use to offer him a glass of water when he came back from office and didn’t cook tasty food. However, his petition was turned down by the family court and Bombay High Court also supported the decision.
The husband lives in Santacruz and he wants divorce on grounds of cruelty. As per his claims, his wife who is also a working woman didn’t cook food timely and the food made by her is not tasty. Moreover, she neither spent time with him nor gave him a glass of water when he returned from work, adding that she abused his parents.
The petitioner stated that it was on 13th February 2005 that he got married. Post marriage, his wife had “negative attitude” towards his parents and didn’t treat them properly. As per the husband, his wife is a teacher by profession who used to wake up late and when he and his family made attempts of waking her up early, she abused them. He added in his petition that after returning, she used to sleep for almost two hours after 6pm and used to make food only after 8:30pm.
The petition added,
“… The food cooked by her was neither tasty nor sufficient and when he (husband) used to return home after many hours of hard work, the Respondent (wife) hardly used to spend quality time with him. She never used to offer him a glass of water on his returning home.”
It was in the year 2012 that the man filed for divorce and when the family court denied it, he made an appeal in Bombay High Court.
On the contrary, the wife said that she never had a disrespecting attitude towards husband or in-laws. She left house early morning and before going for work, she made food for everyone as well as packed tiffins for herself and husband. Here’s what she stated,
“She was burdened with considerable workload in her school and used to return home at around 5:30 to 6pm. On her way back, she used to buy vegetables. After coming home, she used to prepare tea for herself and in-laws and then used to cook food for everybody.”
This is what a bench comprising Justice Sarang Kotwal and Justice K K Tated observed,
“…the Respondent (wife) herself was a working woman. In addition to attending her job, she was admittedly cooking in the morning as well as in the evening. It is obvious that she herself used to get tired and still she was cooking for the family and yet was doing other household work.”
The bench stated that the husband’s allegations don’t amount to cruelty and hence ordered,
“Thus, taking overall view of the matter, we do not find any merit in the appeal.”
What do you have to say in this connection? Let us know your views.