Delhi High Court Rejects Omar Abdullah’s Plea For Early Hearing In Divorce Case Since Wife Is Not Consenting

The Delhi High Court on Thursday rejected former Jammu and Kashmir’s Chief Minister Omar Abdullah’s plea for seeking an early hearing of his divorce appeal. The application was against a trial court order that had rejected his divorce back in 2016. The high court dismissed his appeal citing how his wife’s consent was also required for re-issuing the date.

Omar’s plea to the Delhi high court was rejected due to “lack of cooperation” from the other side — cited as the main reason. The appeal would be considered only if both the parties agree, said a bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Subramonium Prasad. They stated that the high court’s Registrar General has already issued a circular wherein it clearly stated, that during the restricted functioning of courts due to COVID-19, the court will be working only on urgent pending matters, subject to both parties agreeing.

However, the bench said, in case of Abdullah’s pending divorce case, his estranged wife, Payal Abdullah hasn’t consented. It quoted,

In the view of the fact that this application is not accompanied by any consent from the other side (Payal Abdullah) and nor is the counsel for the respondent present in the hearing, though we are informed that an advance copy of the application was served on them, we are not in a position to accede to the prayer made in the application.

ALSO READ –

Supreme Court Grants Divorce To Husband On Grounds Of Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage After 22-Yrs

The bench further added that the application could not be accepted and thus the same had to be dismissed. Omar’s lawyer although argued in the court, that there had been “lack of cooperation” from the other side, and that was the primary reason for filing this appeal.

Background

Omar Abdullah, son of Farooq Abdullah, married Payal Nath in 1994 and together the couple has two sons. However, Omar claims that his marriage had completely broken down in the year 2007 and since 2009, he has been living separately from his estranged wife.

In 2016, while seeking a divorce petition, Omar in his plea had claimed before the trial court that his marriage had been broken irretrievably. On August 30, 2016, the trial court dismissed his plea seeking divorce from Payal, stating husband had failed to prove the grounds of irretrievable breakdown of the marriage.

Omar had also alleged ‘Cruelty’ and ‘Desertion’ as other two grounds for permitting him divorce. According to the trial court, husband had failed to prove his claims and it then stated,

Omar failed to prove his case for divorce on the ground of cruelty. The petitioner (Omar) has not ben able to explain a single circumstance to show that the supervising circumstances have erupted which has made it impossible for him to continue his relationship with the respondent (Payal).

Rather, evidence shows that they were in continuous contact till the filing of the divorce petition.

ALSO READ –

SC Dissolves Two-Month Marriage After 16-Yrs | Invokes Irretrievable Breakdown As Ground For Divorce

The court had also said in its order, that there was not an iota of evidence in regard to the circumstances which had prevailed to prompt the petitioner to file the divorce plea. The petition before the trial court had alleged that Omar was subjected to “unreasonable conduct” of Payal, causing pain and harassment to the politician.

Infact in March 2018, Omar had also appealed to Delhi High Court that he wanted to remarry and thus appealed for divorce yet again that would set him free from a dead legal bond.

Both sons reside with the mother and Payal had also demanded Rs. 15 lakh monthly maintenance from Omar. Read article below.

Our Take:

• Omar’s pending divorce matter is a classic example of the flawed matrimonial laws in our country
• However, being a politician, he must be equally blamed for not being vocal enough in parliament against such regressive laws that are heavily gender biased
• Without being judgemental about either parties here, the larger issue is how our legal system compels a couple to remain in a dead relationship, because either party chooses not to set free the other…..at least legally

ALSO READ –

After 33-Yrs, Wife Who Deserted Husband Shows “Magnanimity” Of Not Contesting Divorce Further | Man Pays Alimony

• India still does not have ‘no fault divorce’ or ‘irretrievable breakdown of marriage’ as grounds for divorce
• Our courts are filled with dead, impractical ego battles being fought for decades, because a wife is vindictive and does not want to let go her partner……despite no hope of co-habitation again
• The messaging by our system supporting such backward and women centric laws in 2020 just demonstrates, how we have zero value for men, and any divorce which is granted finally by supreme court after 20-30 years has no meaning in the life of any couple

ALSO READ –

http://voiceformenindia.com/in-the-news/payal-nath-omar-abdullah-abp-interview/

http://voiceformenindia.com/his-story/jammu-family-marries-mentally-unstable-girl-by-fraud/

http://voiceformenindia.com/his-story/fake-dowry-harassment-charges-delhi/

We are now on Telegram. You can also join us on our Facebook Group

Join our Facebook Group or follow us on social media by clicking on the icons below