A Delhi court has rejected a ₹50 lakh lawsuit filed by a woman against another individual, alleging that the defendant deliberately 'stole' her husband's affection and caused the collapse of her marriage. District Judge Atul Ahlawat of Saket Courts, in an order issued on August 20, found insufficient evidence to support the wife's claim.
Court Cites Lack of Direct Evidence
The court determined that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the other woman intentionally induced or encouraged the husband to abandon his wife. It highlighted that mere suspicion or information from a deceased driver, unable to testify, could not serve as proof. The ruling clarified that a consensual relationship between two adults outside a marriage, even if it leads to a child, does not automatically fulfill the requirements for a tort of 'alienation of affection'.
Furthermore, the court underscored that the primary responsibility for upholding the marriage rested with the husband. It stated that the third party had no legal obligation to reject his advances, as the duty of a conjugal relationship was solely the husband's.
Wife's Allegations and Marital History
The couple married in November 2001. In her 2024 lawsuit, the wife claimed her husband began a relationship with the other woman after a 2009 trip to the United States. She alleged he left their matrimonial home in January 2013, subsequently entering into a bigamous marriage in 2015 and having a daughter in September 2016 with the defendant. The wife sought damages for mental trauma, financial difficulties, and loss of companionship, asserting the other woman knew of her husband's existing marriage.
Understanding Alienation of Affection
The wife's claim was based on the common law tort of 'alienation of affection', also known as a 'heart-balm' action. This legal concept allows a spouse to seek damages from a third party who intentionally interferes with a marriage, leading to its dissolution. While not specifically enacted as law in India, the Supreme Court has acknowledged its existence in certain contexts.
For such a claim to succeed, a claimant must prove:
- Genuine affection existed between the couple prior to the alleged interference.
- This affection was destroyed.
- The third party's intentional or malicious conduct directly caused the loss of affection.
The court explicitly stated that an extra-marital relationship alone is not sufficient grounds, and an individual cannot be held liable simply for becoming the object of another person's affection.
Wife's Testimony Reveals Marital Abuse
Crucially, the court also found that the wife failed to establish a loving and affectionate relationship with her husband before the alleged interference. During cross-examination, she admitted to experiencing instances of physical, emotional, and mental abuse throughout their marriage. She also testified that her husband had denied her physical intimacy for most of their marriage after the initial two or three years.
Considering these factors, the Delhi court declined to grant the wife any relief, although it did reject the defendants' argument that the suit was time-barred, categorizing alienation of affection as a continuing wrong.