High Court: Husband Treating Wife as “Cash Cow” Constitutes Mental Cruelty

A couple was granted a divorce by the Karnataka High Court after it determined that the husband had treated the wife like a “cash cow.” A split bench of Justices Alok Aradhe and J. M. Khazi recently ruled that it is inhumane for a husband to treat his wife like a “cash cow.” To demonstrate that she had given him 60 lakh over the years, the woman had provided bank account transaction records and other papers.

The judgement declared, “It is clear that the respondent (husband) treated the appellant with a materialistic mindset and treated her like a cash cow. The Respondent didn’t feel any affection for the appellant. It is necessary to establish a case of mental cruelty that the respondent’s behaviour alone has caused the appellant mental anguish and emotional suffering.” In 2020, a Family Court denied her request for a divorce and rejected it. The wife subsequently appealed the lower court’s decision to the HC.

“The Family Court has gravely erred in not recognising the version of the appellant (wife) and it ought to have been realised that the appellant’s testimony was not even put to cross questioning,” the high court bench said in setting aside the lower court’s judgement. In Chikkamagaluru, in 1999, the pair was wed. In 2001, they had a kid. In 2017, the wife filed for divorce.

According to the wife, the financial difficulties in the husband’s family “led to disputes and arguments amongst parents, siblings, and children.” To pay off the family debt, she accepted a position in the United Arab Emirates. She also made a land purchase in her husband’s name. However, he “failed to be financially independent and was dependent on her instead of providing for the appellant’s financial needs.” In 2012, she even opened a salon there for him. But in 2013, he went back to India.

The husband did not attend in the lower court’s divorce petition, and the matter was determined ex parte. According to the lower court, the allegations of maltreatment were unfounded.

Picture Courtesy: Google/images are subject to copyright