Placing reliance on this judgement, the Supreme Court, in Nagendra v. K. Meena (MANU/ SC/1180/2016:(2016) 9 SCC 455), observed that unsubstantiated allegations of the extra-marital affair with the maid levelled by the wife against the husband, amount to cruelty. When there is a complete lack of evidence to suggest such an affair, the baseless and reckless allegations are serious actions which can be a cause for mental cruelty warranting a decree of divorce. Making such serious allegations against the respondent/husband again amounts to cruelty as has been held in Jayachandra v. Aneel Kaur (MANU/SC/1023/2004:(2005) SCCR 65) and Harminder Kaur v. Major M.S. Brar (II (1992) DMC 431).
In view of above discussion and settled position of law, we are of the considered opinion that the learned Additional District Judge in its well-reasoned judgment of 16.07.2005 has rightly concluded that the appellant/wife had treated the respondent/husband with physical and mental cruelty entitling him to divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955”. [Extract from Saroj v. Suraj Mal decided on October 31, 2023 by Delhi High Court, MANU/ DE/7461/2023]
What does the Supreme Court consider as the worst form of cruelty in matrimonial law, based on the provided para?
- Allegations which lack evidence and affects reputation of a spouse
- Allegations which could cause mental pain and agony.
- Unsubstantiated allegations of unchastity and extra-marital relationships
- Wrong allegations made in written statement or suggested in the course of examination
The Correct Option is C
Solution and Explanation
The Supreme Court has held that baseless allegations of unchastity and extra-
marital relationships constitute the worst form of cruelty in matrimonial disputes, as they
severely harm the reputation and dignity of the spouse.
The correct option is (C): Unsubstantiated allegations of unchastity and extra-marital relationships
In the case of Nagendra v. K. Meena, the Supreme Court of India concluded that:
- Unsubstantiated allegations of an extra-marital affair with the maid by the wife are evidence of the character of the wife and hence divorce can be granted.
- Baseless and reckless allegations of an extra-marital affair with the maid by the wife cannot be accepted and can be considered as cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
- Lack of evidence in the case of an extra-marital affair with the maid is inconclusive
- The husband’s actions are irrelevant in determining cruelty. When there is a complete lack of evidence to suggest an affair a decree of divorce can be granted.
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
In Nagendra v. K. Meena, the Court held that baseless accusations regarding extra-
marital affairs constitute cruelty and can be grounds for divorce.
The correct option is (B): Baseless and reckless allegations of an extra-marital affair with the maid by the wife cannot be accepted and can be considered as cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
In the case of Jayachandra v. Aneel Kaur, what action is considered as cruelty against the respondent/husband ?
- Any serious allegation, which cannot be proved with evidence
- Any unsubstantiated allegations, which cannot be considered as a ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
- Physical or mental violence, which can be considered as cruelty under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
- Allegations of the unproved extra-marital affair.
The Correct Option is D
Solution and Explanation
In Jayachandra v. Aneel Kaur, allegations of an unproven extra-marital affair were
considered as cruelty, adversely impacting the dignity and peace of the spouse.
The correct option is (D): Allegations of the unproved extra-marital affair.
Based on the above passage, give the reason why the Supreme Court in the mentioned para concluded that the appellant/wife treated the respondent/husband with cruelty?
- Her actions before the court fit in the meaning of cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the HMA, 1955
- It is a settled position of law that unsubstantiated serious allegations amount to cruelty.
- Under the reformulated concept of cruelty in matrimonial law, not only physical violence but causing mental agony is a matrimonial offence.
- There is lack of evidence for the allegations made by wife.
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
The Court found that making unsubstantiated allegations of infidelity constitutes
cruelty, aligning with established legal principles under matrimonial law.
The correct option is (B): It is a settled position of law that unsubstantiated serious allegations amount to cruelty.
According to the Supreme Court’s observations in the provided para, what did the court emphasize regarding the quality of allegations related to unchastity and extra-marital relationships?
- False allegations of unchastity and extra-marital relationships is a ground for divorce
- They are one of the factors in determining cruelty.
- They constitute a grave assault on the character, honour, and reputation of the spouse.
- They should only be considered if proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
The Court has underscored that baseless allegations regarding unchastity or extra-
marital affairs are significant factors in establishing cruelty under matrimonial law.
The correct option is (B): They are one of the factors in determining cruelty.
Top Questions on Family Laws
- Mother’s right to care and custody of a child under Muslim law is known as
- AILET LLM - 2026
- Legal Studies
- Family Laws
- Consider the given statements:
(i) After the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, the court shall not recognise any pious obligation of a son under the Hindu law to discharge any debt due from his father.
(ii) Right of creditor to proceed against a son to recover any debt due from his father solely on the ground of the pious obligation under the Hindu law shall not be affected if the debt was contracted before the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005.
Choose the correct answer from the options given below.
- AILET LLM - 2026
- Legal Studies
- Family Laws
- One person is said to be ____ of another if the two are related by blood or adoption wholly through males.
- AILET LLM - 2026
- Legal Studies
- Family Laws
- According to Section 2(34) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, the ‘inter-country adoption’ means
- AILET LLM - 2026
- Legal Studies
- Family Laws
- Any pronouncement of talaq by a Muslim husband upon his wife, in any manner shall be ____.
- AILET LLM - 2026
- Legal Studies
- Family Laws
Questions Asked in CLAT PG exam
The document presents a critique of the United Nations (UN) organization, arguing that it has failed to carry out its charter-mandated tasks, specifically to ”maintain international peace and security” and ”to achieve international cooperation” in solving global problems. The author notes growing public frustration with catastrophic humanitarian situations and the failure of peace-keeping operations, leading to widespread scepticism about the possibility of ”revitalization”.
UN Reform Approaches
Discussions on UN reform are divided into two main categories: the conservative approach and the radical approach.
1. Conservative Approach:
The conservative view considers the existing Charter ”practically untouchable” and believes in improving ”collective security” as defined in Chapter VII. Key positions include:
- US Position: Prioritizes its own interests, supports better management and the creation of an Inspector General, favours enlarging the Security Council (to include Germany and Japan, mainly for financing peace-keeping), and associates the UN with regional organizations like NATO for peace enforcement. The US remains reluctant to allow full application of Chapter VII and views collective security restrictively.
- Secretary-General’s Position (Boutros Ghali): Advocated for the full implementation of ’collective security’ as envisaged in 1945, including the use of the Military Staff Committee (Article 47) and the conclusion of special agreements (Article 43) for providing armed forces. He also proposed ’peace enforcement units’ under the command of the Secretary-General and wider use of ’preventive diplomacy’. The report candidly recognized the Security Council’s incapacity to deal with threats from a major power.
2. Radical Approach:
The radical approach criticizes the principles of the present system and proposes an overhaul. It reflects increasing doubts about the value of the Charter’s collective security system, especially in intra-State conflicts. Radical proposals include:
- Establishing an Economic Security Council.
- Modifying the Charter with less reluctance.
- Reforming the IMF and World Bank.
- Developing a new global security system .
- The creation of a consultative parliamentary assembly at the world level.
Future Outlook:
The author asserts that no major or minor reform has any chance of being implemented now, primarily because the Charter’s amendment procedures (requiring a two-thirds majority including all five permanent Security Council members) preclude agreement. However, he concludes that the continuing deterioration of the global situation, driven by economic integration, rising inequality, and intra-State conflicts, will inevitably lead the political establishment to define a new global institutional structure. This future debate will become highly political.
- CLAT PG - 2026
- International Law
“Section 55 of the Indian Contract Act says that when a party to a contract promises to do a certain thing within a specified time but fails to do so, the contract or so much of it as has not been performed, becomes voidable at the option of the promisee if the intention of the parties was, that time should be of the essence of the contract. If time is not the essence of the contract, the contract does not become voidable by the failure to do such thing on or before the specified time but the promisee is entitled to compensation from the promisor for any loss occasioned to him by such failure. Further, if in case of a contract voidable on account of the promisor’s failure to perform his promise within the time agreed and the promisee accepts performance of such promise at any time other than that agreed, the promisee cannot claim compensation for any loss occasioned by the non-performance of the promise at the time agreed, unless, at the time of such acceptance he gives notice to the promisor of his intention to do so.
Sections 73 and 74 deal with consequences of breach of contract. Heading of Sec tion 73 is compensation for loss or damage caused by breach of contract. When a contract is broken, the party who suffers by such breach is entitled to receive from the party who has broken the contract compensation for any loss or damage caused to him thereby which naturally arose in the usual course of things from such breach or which the parties knew when they made the contract to be likely to result from the breach of it. On the other hand, Section 74 deals with compen sation for breach of contract where penalty is stipulated for. When a contract is broken, if a sum is mentioned in the contract as the amount to be paid in case of such breach or if the contract contains any other stipulation by way of penalty, the party complaining of the breach is entitled whether or not actually damage or loss is proved to have been caused thereby, to receive from the party who has broken the contract reasonable compensation not exceeding the amount so named or the penalty stipulated for.”
tracted from: Consolidated Construction Consortium Limited v Software Technol ogy Parks of India 2025 INSC 574- CLAT PG - 2026
- Contract Law
“Law treats all contracts with equal respect and unless a contract is proved to suffer from any of the vitiating factors, the terms and conditions have to be enforced regardless of the relative strengths and weakness of the parties.
Section 28 of the Contract Act does not bar exclusive jurisdiction clauses. What has been barred is the absolute restriction of any party from approaching a legal forum. The right to legal adjudication cannot be taken away from any party through contract but can be relegated to a set of Courts for the ease of the parties. In the present dispute, the clause does not take away the right of the employee to pursue a legal claim but only restricts the employee to pursue those claims before the courts in Mumbai alone.
... the Court must already have jurisdiction to entertain such a legal claim. This limb pertains to the fact that a contract cannot confer jurisdiction on a court that did not have such a jurisdiction in the first place.”
Extracted from: Rakesh Kumar Verma v HDFC Bank Ltd 2025 INSC 473- CLAT PG - 2026
- Contract Law
- “The law is well settled that a constitutional court can award monetary compen sation against the State and its officials for its failure to safeguard fundamental rights of citizens but there is no system or method to measure the damages caused in such situations. Quite often the courts have a difficult task in determining dam ages in various fact situations. The yardsticks normally adopted for determining the compensation payable in private tort claims are not as such applicable when a constitutional court determines the compensation in cases where there is a viola tion of fundamental rights guaranteed to its citizens.
... In D.K. Basu v. State of W.B. [(1997) SCC 1 416], a Constitution Bench of this Court held that there is no straitjacket formula for computation of damages and we find that there is no uniformity or yardstick followed in awarding damages for violation of fundamental rights. In Rudul Sah case [Rudul Sah v. State of Bihar, (1983) 4 SCC 141] this Court used the terminology ’palliative’ for measuring the damages and the formula of ’adhoc’ was applied. In Sebastian Hongray case [Se bastian M. Hongray v. Union of India, (1984) 3 SCC 82] the expression used by this Court for determining the monetary compensation was ’exemplary’ costs and the formula adopted was ’punitive’. In Bhim Singh case [Bhim Singh v. State of J & K, (1985) 4 SCC 677], the expression used by the Court was ’compensation’ and the method adopted was ’tortious formula’. In D.K. Basu v. State of W.B. [(1997) SCC 1 416] the expression used by this Court for determining the compensation was ’monetary compensation’. The formula adopted was ’cost to cost’ method. Courts have not, therefore, adopted a uniform criterion since no statutory formula has been laid down.”
tracted from: Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi v Uphaar Tragedy Victims Association (2011) 14 SCC 481- CLAT PG - 2026
- Constitutional Laws
- It is well recognized that actionable negligence in context of medical profession involves three constituents (i) duty to exercise due care; (ii) breach of duty and (iii) consequential damage. However, a simple lack of care, an error of judgment or an accident is not sufficient proof of negligence on part of the medical professional so long as the doctor follows the acceptable practice of the medical profession in discharge of his duties. He cannot be held liable for negligence merely because a better alternative treatment or course of treatment was available or that more skilled doctors were there who could have administered better treatment.
A medical professional may be held liable for negligence only when he is not pos sessed with the requisite qualification or skill or when he fails to exercise reasonable skill which he possesses in giving the treatment. None of the above two essential conditions for establishing negligence stand satisfied in the case at hand as no ev idence was brought on record to prove that Dr. Neeraj Sud had not exercised due diligence, care or skill which he possessed in operating the patient and giving treatment to him. When reasonable care, expected of the medical professional, is extended or rendered to the patient unless contrary is proved, it would not be a case for actionable negligence.
tracted with edits and revisions from Neeraj Sud v Jaswinder Singh 2024 INSC 825- CLAT PG - 2026
- Law of Torts