S Vs. Y

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the original Respondent before the Family Court, the wife, against the original Petitioner, the husband.

(2.) We have consciously masked the parties' names from the title of this judgement. During the course of hearings, we asked Learned Counsel for the parties whether there was any possibility of an amicable settlement. We were told that the wife did not wish to take a divorce, even by mutual consent; she saw this as a stigma. This is unfortunate and regrettable, but we must respect her views. That said, we felt it would be even more traumatic if, after hearing parties, we were to find for the husband against the wife, and uphold the decree of divorce. Our findings might well prey far more on the mind and emotions of the wife than a decree for divorce by mutual consent. That our orders and judgements are now very much in the public domain and are publicly accessible on the website of the High Court a situation that cannot be changed to allow only selective matters to be uploaded would only exacerbate the problem.

(3.) The parties were married on 28th November 1993 in Mumbai following Hindu Vedic Rites and Customs. For a short while thereafter, they lived together as man and wife at Bandra in Mumbai. They have a son, born on 20th May 1996.