Divorce at 70? Plan some spiritual growth, says Supreme Court

 

JUDGMENT AWAITED

 

Divorce at 70? Plan some spiritual growth, says Supreme Court

Saturday, Aug 28, 2010

At the age of 70, it’s time to go on a pilgrimage to Hardwar and be divorced from the material world, instead of being engaged in a prolonged legal battle for divorce.

These are the words of the Supreme Court for an aged Juhu couple, seeking separation under the Hindu Marriage Act.

Making a bid to make them conscious that the age is catching up, apex court judges on Thursday counseled petitioner Veena, 70, and her husband, Govardhan Kapoor, 75, to share the roof. However, the court suggested that if the two wish, they may keep themselves separated by a wooden partition.

Veena doesn’t want to share the apartment with Govardhan and contested a Bombay high court judgment last year that made her share the accommodation as per a mutual agreement between them in the divorce case.

The couple married in Delhi on April 26, 1969. They have two sons — Navin, 36, who lives in America, and Sachin, 33, lives with his father.

In 1981, the couple started litigation after Govardhan suffered heavy losses in his business. Charges and counter charges ensued and Govardhan alleged that his wife had an extra-marital affair.

Govardhan’s case got stronger after Sachin testified in favour of the allegation.

While Govardhan moved a law suit seeking an injunction against Veena from dispossessing him from the flat, she sought a direction asking him not to enter the house.

Govardhan agreed to the term that Veena is the owner of the flat but he would live there with certain conditions that included installing separate electric meters and demarcating territory with a wooden partition.

But Veena’s lawyer DK Garg on Thursday told a bench headed by justice GS Singhvi that she couldn’t be expected to live under the same roof particularly when she had been accused of being in an adulterous relationship. She lamented that even her son had also sided with his father.

Disposing of her petition, the court said: “You can’t throw out the aged husband, but you can get the son out.”