A three-judge bench discussed the complexity of human behaviour and the subjective nature of the concept of mental cruelty. The court acknowledged that what may be considered cruelty in one situation may not necessarily be viewed as such in another, as it varies based on various factors such as upbringing, sensitivity, cultural background, and personal values.

In the present case, it was found that while there may have been minor disagreements between the parties due to their incompatible temperaments, there was no evidence to suggest that the appellant's ailment was a direct result of the respondent's conduct. There was also insufficient material to establish that the respondent treated the appellant with such cruelty as to warrant a decree of divorce. Therefore, it was concluded that the respondent's behaviour did not amount to cruelty, and thus, no decree of divorce was granted.