A man's plea, seeking Rs 10 lakh damages from the father of a woman who ended her engagement with his NRI son on the ground that the prospective groom had suffered huge loss on shopping and hosting parties for friends, has been rejected by a Delhi court which said it was a counter blast of the bride's complaint.
The court said there was no reason to burden the woman's father with the "extravaganzas" of the plaintiff's son and the court shall not encourage such practice which was derogatory to women.
"I hold that the plaintiff (proposed groom's father) has failed to show any legal right to claim damages, rather the manner in which he has come before this court only confirms that this suit is a counter blast to the criminal proceedings initiated by the defendant (woman's father) against him pursuant to which the plaintiff had to return the amount of Rs five lakh received by him from the defendant," Additional District Judge Kamini Lau said.
The court said the manner in which plaintiff has behaved show his "regressive mind-set and encouraging practices which are derogatory to women and the community which are highly condemnable and which this court cannot permit under any circumstances".
The plaintiff, a resident of Delhi, claimed that he had fixed marriage of his son who lives in US with defendant's daughter, residing in Kerala, in 2007 through a matrimonial website and without any reason, the woman broke engagement.
He alleged in the suit that he and his son incurred huge expenses which included travelling to India to meet the woman, buying expensive gifts and diamond ring for her, throwing parties for his friends and colleagues in US, shopping, taxi fares and telephone bills.
The woman's father responded to the allegations saying that in a discussion, the man and his son wanted to know from his daughter as to what he intended to give in marriage.
The defendant had told them that he intended to give his daughter various articles including gold, land and car.
He claimed the groom insisted that he be given Rs five lakh instead of a car which was given by the bride's family.
Regarding this, the court said that the groom's father has failed to give any explanation as to why he had received Rs five lakh from the defendant prior to the marriage.
"It is this which raises serious questions on his own
credibility and intent. This court shall not encourage any practice which is derogatory to women. Any demand which is in the nature of a condition for finalisation of matrimonial alliance is in the nature of dowry and cannot be encouraged and there is no reason why the plaintiff should be making demands for every single expense allegedly incurred by him.
"In case his son has gone on a shopping spree or is frequently travelling or throwing parties to his friends, it is certainly not the concern of the defendant or his family. There is no reason to burden defendant with the extravaganzas of the plaintiff's son," the court said.
It held that the plaintiff was not entitled to any damages or compensation from the defendant as asked for in the plaint saying he failed to show any legal right to claim the relief.
The court also observed that this case concerns a highly emotive issue relating to grant of damages for breach of promise to marry and there is a raging debate world over in various legal systems as to whether it should be made an enforceable contract or not.
"In my view, stability of marriage is important to society and hence law cannot allow implement of those rights i.E. Right to implement a promise to marry, the threats of which will push people into marriages which they would otherwise would not undertake.
"It is important that parties should be free to terminate their engagements, rather than being pushed into uncomfortable marriages - the possibility of legal action may have the effect of encouraging persons with less than the full matrimonial commitments to marry, resulting in the marriages being unsuccessful," the judge said.
