A 46-year-old man who accused that his wife did not treat him and his family well, filed a divorce petition. However, his petition was turned down by Bombay High Court on Friday upholding the order of Family Court, reported the Indian Express. The man accused that his wife that she did not cook tasty food and did not offer him a glass of water when he returns from work. He also said that she used to abuse and ill-treat his parents.
The man a resident of Santacruz got married on February 13, 2005. He lived with his wife and his parents. He had filed for divorce on grounds of cruelty by his wife. The man said that his wife had “negative attitude” towards his parents. He claimed that his wife – who is also a working woman – abused, insulted and threatened his parents, did not cook food on time and did not cook tasty food. He also said that the woman neither spend time with him nor did she offer him a glass of water after he returned from work.
As per the report, the husband said that his wife is a teacher and used to wake up late. He alleged that when he and his parents tried to wake her up early, she used to abuse them. The petition states that she used to return home after 6 pm and would go to sleep for a couple of hours and only after 8.30 pm. She would later cook food, which according to him was neither tasty nor sufficient.
The husband then filed for divorce in 2012. He had appealed to the High Court after the family court refused to grant him the divorce.
On the other hand, the wife said that she had never treated her husband or his parents with disrespect. As per the report, she used to leave the house early in the morning after preparing tiffin for herself and husband and after cooking food for all the family members. While returning to the home she used to buy vegetables and prepare tea for herself and in-laws once she gets back and then later used to cook food for everybody.
Stating that the allegations made by the husband will not amount to cruelty, a bench of Justice K K Tated and Justice Sarang Kotwal, upheld the Family Court order, and said that they do not find any merit in the appeal. The court said that the respondent (wife) herself was a working woman and in addition to attending her job, she was admittedly cooking in the morning as well as in the evening which is obvious that she herself used to get tired and still she was cooking for the family and yet was doing other household work.