NRI Husband is liable to pay damages to deserted wife
For the father-in-law it was an unfortunate experiment, an effort, 'hoping against hope' forgetting that failure of it would be ruination of the other. For the son it was a pleasure trip. But for the daughter-in-law it was loss of everything, her maidenhood, status, service, dignity and peace. Her dreams stood shattered and she was reduced to nothing. 'Accepting moral responsibility', 'not knowing the son', 'sharing the grief' by the father-in-law are of little avail to the appellant. There is no whisper in the letter that he was willing to compensate for the wrong done to the appellant due to error in his assessment of his own son. It is not the soothing words alone which were needed but some practical solution to the disaster brought about by him. In these desperate circumstances, the wife having been forsaken by her husband and having lost the job had no alternative except to file a suit for damages against the husband and father-in-law for ruining her life in forma pauperis. And the father-in-law who has words of sympathy for the appellant contested her claim to sue in forma pauperis vehemently, though without any success. The suit was decreed ex parte for Rs 22 lakhs and odd.
Supreme Court of India
Neerja Saraph vs Jayant V.Saraph on 6 October, 1994
Equivalent citations: 1994 SCC (6) 461, JT 1994 (6) 488
