The Karnataka Excessive Courtroom has granted a decree of divorce to common Kannada actor ‘Duniya Vijay’ (B.R. Vijay Kumar) on the bottom of cruelty, whereas awarding Rs 2 crores as everlasting alimony to his estranged spouse, Nagarathna. [2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 341]
“…Fame doesn’t create an exception to an individual’s conduct nevertheless it magnifies its customary. When a person of public affect strays from the sanctity of marriage, his fall from grace doesn’t grow to be a trigger for adulation. This Judgment is rendered, not in celebration of the husband’s conduct however inspite of it, contemplating the peculiar info herein. We hope that it serves as a reminder that respect earned on display can not compensate for dereliction of matrimonial obligations at dwelling”, the court docket famous within the order on the outset.
The Division Bench of Justices D.Okay Singh and H. Shanthi Bhushan noticed that whereas the actor’s conduct with one other girl was ‘deplorable’, the spouse’s unsubstantiated allegations of a number of wives amounted to psychological cruelty.
The court docket additional famous that repeated and unsubstantiated allegations in opposition to the Actor having a number of wives made within the media, even in response to media queries, quantity to psychological cruelty.
“…The Respondent has said that the Petitioner has 5 wives, the fifth one being…. Whereas there isn’t any convincing materials on report to show that the Petitioner has certainly married….., so far as the Respondent’s allegations with respect to the opposite wives are involved, the Respondent has failed to position any materials to indicate that the Petitioner has certainly entered into a wedding with 4 different ladies; as such, these allegations stay unsubstantiated”.
Nonetheless, the court docket famous that the conduct of the actor with different ladies constituted conduct that was removed from harmless, by counting on Part 23(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act.
“…If the husband, by his personal conduct, initiatives a 3rd particular person as occupying the place of a spouse or is in any other case concerned intimately with the third particular person, he can not thereafter be heard to say that his legally wedded partner had abandoned him with out his consent…”, the court docket added.
After dissolving the wedding on the bottom of cruelty, the court docket famous that regardless of the non-filing of monetary statements by both facet, it might be famous that the petitioner-actor’s movies are admittedly properly acquired
“….granting a lumpsum quantity as everlasting alimony ensures finality within the matter and minimises any chance of future litigation between the events….Contemplating the necessity to safe monetary stability of the Respondent and the three youngsters and to place quietus to the long-standing litigation, we deem it applicable, within the curiosity of fairness, to direct the Petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,00,000/- as everlasting alimony to the Respondent as a one-time fee”, the court docket accordingly famous within the order.
The court docket additionally famous that the actor’s spouse had created an ‘insupportable setting’ for the actor’s mother and father too.
“….No father or mother takes the drastic step of formally recording their want to exclude their daughter-in-law from their very own funeral… The actual fact that the mother and father thought-about it essential to formally report such a want, subsequently, is itself indicative of the extent of the animosity and misery that should have been occasioned to them by the conduct of the Respondent…”, the court docket opined.
“….A wedding which has damaged down irretrievably, in our opinion spells cruelty to each the events, as in such a relationship every celebration is treating the opposite with cruelty. It’s subsequently a floor for dissolution of marriage below Part 13(1)(i-a) of the Act”, the court docket emphasised additional.
For context, the actor and the respondent received married in 1999 and have three youngsters collectively, all of whom have attained majority. After the wedding relationship turned bitter, the actor filed a divorce plea below Sections 13(1)(i-a) and 13(1) (i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, alleging cruelty and desertion by the respondent spouse.
After a number of rounds of litigation and reconciliations, the household court docket had dismissed the divorce petition on June 13, 2024, main to the current enchantment.
Case Title: B.R. Vijay Kumar (“Duniya Vijay”) v. Smt. Nagarathna
Case No: MFA No.6129/2024 (FC)
Quotation: 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 341
