New Delhi: 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 5 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 5 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 5 lakh from the defendant prior to the marriage.