Does Wife Asking For Separate Residence From Husband's Family Amount To Cruelty? Kerala High Court Answers

The Division Bench of Justice Satish Ninan and Justice P. Krishna Kumar held:

“A demand for a separate residence away from the husband's family, without sufficient reason, by itself constitutes an act of cruelty.”

The Court was considering an appeal filed by a husband challenging the Family Court's order rejecting his petition for divorce.

According to the husband, the couple got married and began residing in Dubai with his family. The wife returned to Kerala on her 7^th month of pregnancy and despite repeated requests she never returned to his house even after the birth of the child, he stated.

He deposed that the wife refused to even speak to him directly, blocked his calls and, that all communications were through her brother. He further alleged that she agreed to go there only on the condition that they live separately from his parents. Other cruelty acts were also pointed out by him, including conduct of the child's naming and feeding ceremonies without consulting him or his family.

He initially preferred a petition for restitution of conjugal rights so as to spend time with the child but during the counselling, the wife made the same demands, which he was not ready to agree to. Realising that there was no scope for resolving their issues, he preferred the divorce petition.

The wife stated that she was not cruel to him and never made the demands as alleged. According to her, there were not any serious issues between them except for her mother-in-law's interference in their marital relationship. She had also stated that the husband and mother-in-law had ill-treated her and because of the same, she decided to live separately.

The husband produced two mobile phones and a CD which allegedly contained the conversations between him and his wife's brother as well as his wife and his father.

The latter conversation, where she stated that she had no issues with the husband or the mother-in-law, was admitted by her during cross examination. With respect to the former conversation, the wife had deposed that she was not aware of what exactly the conversation was about.

After analysing the evidence, the Family Court believed the wife's versions and found that there were no serious disputes between the couple. It then dismissed the husband's petition for divorce. Aggrieved, he approached the High Court.

The Court noted that though the wife alleged cruelty on the husband's and mother-in-law's part, she had also admitted the telephone conversation between her and her father-in-law that there were no issues with them. It also refused to believe her version during re-examination that that conversation was an attempt to avoid a divorce. Thus, it was of the view that the allegation of cruelty made out by the wife was devoid of factual basis.

Looking at the wife's stand regarding the conversation with her brother and her husband, the Court was of the view that she was evasive in answering questions whereas the husband's version was more believable.

The Court also found that the wife's demand for separate residence was without any valid reason and that she deserted her husband without any justifiable cause. Thus, it was of the opinion that the husband was entitled to get divorced.

Thus, it allowed the appeal.

Case No: Mat. Appeal No.308/2022

Case Title: N v. R

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 431

Counsel of petitioner: C. Leena

Counsel for the respondent: T.V. Jayakumar Namboodiri

Click to Read/Download Judgment