Withholding Mutual Consent In A Failed Marriage Is Nothing But Cruelty- Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court in a Divorce case has held that withholding mutual consent in a failed marriage is nothing but cruelty. A matrimonial appeal was preferred by the husband who was unsuccessful before the Family Court to obtain divorce on the grounds of cruelty.
A Division Bench comprising Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Sophy Thomas observed, “The court rooms cannot be replaced to allow the parties for a battle for grooming their egos and idiosyncratic behaviour. The Court is established for genuine people who honestly dispute on the cause. If they cannot live together even by sharing residence for more than a decade, it can be presumed that sense is lost on both. The idea of no fault divorce is making the people to realise that there is a sensible way of parting on a mutually agreed terms. Withholding mutual consent in a failed marriage is nothing but cruelty.”
Advocate P. Narayanan appeared for the appellant/husband while Advocate G. Sreekumar (Chelur) appeared for the respondent/wife.
In this case, the marriage between the parties was in accordance with the Hindu religious rites and ceremonies and two children were born in wedlock. The appellant/husband was in Muscat and now came down to India and settled. He alleged that the respondent/wife hailed from a poor family and was more interested in extracting money from him. It was submitted that the entire money sent by him from Muscat was misused and even the money sent for construction of house was squandered away.
The appellant also alleged that the respondent had an illicit relationship with the husband of her sister. The neglect and apathy towards him were one of the cruelty alleged in the petition for divorce. The appellant also claimed that differences in the family emerged when a dispute arose between the respondent's family with the widow of respondent's brother, as the appellant supported her case. The respondent denied all the allegations of cruelty raised by the appellant. Hence, the matter was before the court.
The High Court in view of the above facts noted, “We, thus, realise that this fight is not for any justifiable cause but to win the egos and to wreak vengeance against other spouse. In recent judgment of the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.5454 of 2023 (2023 Live Law sc 727), it was held that keeping parties together despite irretrievable break down of marriage amounts to cruelty on both sides.”
The Court said that the appeal has to be allowed and the marriage has to be dissolved but, however, it directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs. 10 Lakhs towards permanent alimony and 10 cents of land to the respondent.
“The appellant-husband is directed to produce the sketch earmarking the ten cents of land within a period of one week. The respondent shall signify before this Court regarding her willingness to accept the 10 cents of land offered by her husband within a further period of one week”, further directed the Court.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the appeal.
Cause Title- Sreedharan v. Ahsa (2023:KER:55324)
