Shikhar Dhawan’s Divorce With Wife Ayesha Mukerji Finalised By Delhi Family Court On Grounds Of ‘Cruelty By Wife’
The Delhi Family Court has decided to end Shikhar Dhawan's marriage to his wife, Ayesha Mukerji, after the couple had been together for 11 years.
Shikhar Dhawan, the captain of the Punjab Kings (PBKS) and member of Team India, was granted a divorce from his estranged wife Ayesha Mukerji on Wednesday, citing "cruelty by wife." This decision was a huge relief from the Delhi Family Court.
Judge Harish Kumar noted that the couple had agreed to end their 11-year marriage and that they had been living apart since August 8, 2020.
The respondent, who is Dhawan's estranged wife, chose to leave the case unsettled, and the court saw this as an intention to grant a divorce decree while acknowledging culpability for marriage violations.
"There is no dispute that both parties had agreed to take divorce by mutual consent and that their marriage is otherwise dead long ago and have not been living as husband and wife since August 8, 2020," declared Harish Kumar's family court judge, ending their 11-year marriage.
"Intentionally leaving this matter uncontested by the respondent/estranged wife also demonstrates her desire for the court to grant a divorce decree, even if it means finding her guilty of a matrimonial offence.
She knows that even if she is found to have treated the petitioner cruelly, she will not suffer any harm because she has already received sufficient favourable orders from the Federal Circuit and Family Court in Australia," the court stated in its decision in Dhawan's favour.
"She has the guts to willfully and consciously disobey the court's orders of March 2, 2023, and June 6, 2023, because of her. Because of this, the Court stated, "petitioners are entitled to a divorce decree on the grounds of cruelty in the facts and circumstances of the present case as discussed above."
In spite of the fact that earlier court orders dated March 2, 2023, and June 6, 2023 were broken, the court determined that Dhawan was entitled to a divorce decree on the grounds of cruelty.
As a result, under Section 13(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, the marriage that was consummated on November 30, 2012, in accordance with Sikh traditions, has been formally dissolved (HMA).
In addition to requesting full custody of his younger son, Shikhar Dhawan asserts that the respondent's conduct, which have included ongoing criminal proceedings and persistently negative acts towards the child since birth, are morally and psychologically damaging. Differing orders from Australian and Indian courts further complicate custody matters.
The respondent was also ordered by the Delhi court to withdraw her Australian proceedings, citing the "doctrine of forum convenience" and the commencement of the initial proceedings in India, while Dhawan was directed by an Australian court to withdraw his claims for custody that were pending in India.
"The youngster is in Australia and is an Australian citizen. The court stated that an order or verdict can only be successfully enforced in another country's territory if the government of that nation is ready to do so, either willingly or in accordance with international commitments.
"In the interim, the respondent is hereby directed to bring the child to India for visitation purposes, including an overnight stay, with the petitioner and his family, subject to the child's academic schedule, at least for half of the school vacation period during the academic calendar.
In addition, the respondent must allow the kid to have unsupervised meetings with the petitioner in Australia for an appropriate amount of time whenever the petitioner travels with prior notice, the court said, taking into account the child's academic schedule.
In his plea, Dhawan claimed to have discovered, following their marriage, that the respondent's main goal was to take advantage of him financially and to threaten to defame him and ruin his profession if he would not comply with her requests.
"The respondent forced the petitioner to give her joint ownership of two properties and 99% ownership of one after he used his own money to purchase three real estate holdings in Australia.
In his plea, Shikhar Dhawan claimed that the respondent had seized a portion of the net sale revenues of one property and the full net sale proceeds of the second property and was requesting that the title of the third property be given to her.