A Mumbai Man moved Bombay High Court for obtaining divorce on grounds that his wife wasn't dutiful as she didn't cook tasty food.
High Court Bench upheld the order of the Family Court dismissing the divorce plea. Justices KK Tated and Sarang Kotwal took into account that the Petitioner's Wife was a working woman, she had to handle additional burden of buying groceries and cooking food for the entire family. The Bench maintained not cooking tasty food doesn't amount to cruelty and the plea for divorce can't be entertained.
In the petition, The Husband alleged his wife would wake up late and abuse his parents if they try to wake her up. He complained she would go to bed after returning from work at 6 pm and cooks dinner only around 8.30 pm. 'Neither she cooks tasty food nor spends quality time with me. She won't even offer a glass of water on days when I arrive late from office,' he alleged.
However, The Wife condemned the allegations and submitted evidence to prove her version is right. She even alleged her husband and in-laws had ill-treated her. Both Family Court and High Court favoured the wife of the petitioner in this case.
High Court Bench upheld the order of the Family Court dismissing the divorce plea. Justices KK Tated and Sarang Kotwal took into account that the Petitioner's Wife was a working woman, she had to handle additional burden of buying groceries and cooking food for the entire family. The Bench maintained not cooking tasty food doesn't amount to cruelty and the plea for divorce can't be entertained.
In the petition, The Husband alleged his wife would wake up late and abuse his parents if they try to wake her up. He complained she would go to bed after returning from work at 6 pm and cooks dinner only around 8.30 pm. 'Neither she cooks tasty food nor spends quality time with me. She won't even offer a glass of water on days when I arrive late from office,' he alleged.
However, The Wife condemned the allegations and submitted evidence to prove her version is right. She even alleged her husband and in-laws had ill-treated her. Both Family Court and High Court favoured the wife of the petitioner in this case.