Wakilii

Amrita Nayer v Shivay Kundra (Divorce Cause No. 87 of 2025)

High Court · [2026] UGHCFD 13 · 2026 Petition Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Petition for divorce on grounds of cruelty; respondent filed answer and cross-petition also alleging cruelty
Decision
Marriage dissolved by decree nisi; respondent's cross-petition dismissed; no orders made concerning child as English Family Courts determined to be appropriate forum

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The High Court granted a decree nisi dissolving the marriage on grounds of cruelty by the respondent husband, finding that his conduct including physical violence, choking, and sexual violence created danger and reasonable apprehension of danger to the petitioner's mental and physical health. The court declined to make custody, maintenance, or travel orders concerning the child, holding that the Family Courts in England and Wales were the appropriate forum as the child is a British citizen habitually resident in the United Kingdom.

Outcome

Marriage dissolved by decree nisi; respondent's cross-petition dismissed; no orders made concerning child as English Family Courts determined to be appropriate forum

Facts

The parties married on 3 January 2024 at the Civil Marriage Registry in Kampala, following a religious Sikh marriage in Nairobi in September 2023. The marriage produced one child, KVK, born 20 March 2024. The petitioner, a 29-year-old British citizen and company director, alleged the respondent, a 34-year-old Indian citizen with Ugandan residence, subjected her to physical, sexual, and emotional cruelty including choking and aggressive sexual conduct that resulted in medical complications requiring removal of her ovary. A protection order was granted in her favour by the Magistrate's Court. The respondent denied the allegations and filed a cross-petition alleging the petitioner was cruel by alienating him from the child after she left Uganda in April 2025 for medical treatment and remained in the UK. The child is a British citizen residing in the UK with the petitioner. The parties agreed there was no matrimonial property and no alimony was sought.

Issues

  1. Whether there are any grounds for the dissolution of the marriage between the parties?
  2. Whether both parties should have custody of the issue of the marriage and if so, how?
  3. Whether both parties should provide maintenance for the issue of the marriage and if so, how?
  4. Whether either party should obtain the consent of the other party when travelling with the issue of the marriage out of the country?
  5. What remedies are available to the parties?

Orders

  • A Decree Nisi is granted dissolving the marriage between Amrita Nayer and Shivay Kundra celebrated on 3rd January, 2024.
  • No orders are made in respect of custody, access, or maintenance concerning the child KVK.
  • No orders are made in respect of international travel concerning the child.
  • Each party shall bear their own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Family Law — Divorce — Cruelty — Legal Test
To constitute cruelty as grounds for divorce, the conduct complained of must be serious and higher than the ordinary wear and tear of married life, and there must be danger to life, limbs, health, or mental health, or a reasonable apprehension of such danger.
Family Law — Divorce — Cruelty — Cumulative Effect of Conduct
Cruelty is not established by one isolated incident but by the cumulative effect of conduct over time, and all incidents and quarrels between spouses must be weighed from the perspective of their impact on the aggrieved spouse's mental and physical health.
Evidence — Domestic Violence — Absence of Police Report
The absence of a police report does not negate the occurrence of alleged domestic violence, as victims within marriage frequently do not report incidents to authorities due to shame, fear of retaliation, hope for reconciliation, or concern for the family unit.
Evidence — Protection Orders — Relevance in Divorce Proceedings
While a protection order granted under the Domestic Violence Act is not determinative of cruelty in divorce proceedings, it is relevant evidence that the court found the petitioner required protection from the respondent and supports claims of fear and apprehension of harm.
Family Law — Child Custody — Jurisdiction — Habitual Residence
Where a child is habitually resident in a foreign jurisdiction and is a citizen of that country, the courts of that jurisdiction are the appropriate forum for determining custody, access, and maintenance, and the Ugandan court should decline to exercise jurisdiction even where it has technical jurisdiction over the parties to the divorce.
Family Law — Child Welfare — Paramountcy Principle — Forum Selection
The paramount consideration in any matter concerning a child is the child's welfare and best interests, and where a child resides in a foreign jurisdiction, the child's welfare is best served by having custody and access arrangements determined by the court in that jurisdiction which has the investigative tools and enforcement mechanisms to assess and monitor the child's welfare.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (5)

  • Kasasa v Kasasa (Divorce Cause No. 13 of 1976)
  • Habyarimana v Habyarimana (1980) HCB 139
  • Mukulu Jane Gladys v Christopher Mukwaba (Divorce Cause No. 16 of 2021)
  • Harriet Generosa v Nick Chilles Muramira (Divorce Cause No. 183 of 2022)
  • [2012] UGCA 4

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Amrita Nayer v Shivay Kundra (Divorce Cause No. 87 of 2025) [2026] UGHCFD 13 (13 February 2026)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.