In this matrimonial appeal, the Kerala High Court rejected the wife's challenge against a Family Court order granting a divorce decree in her favor. The Court confirmed the lower court's finding that the wife's conduct constituted cruelty, relying on evidence from witnesses including their daughter.
Appeal dismissed; parties to suffer respective costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 20TH KARTHIKA, 1941
Mat.Appeal.No.111 OF 2006
AGAINST THE ORDER IN OP 68/2005 DATED 31.03.2006 OF FAMILY COURT, THODUPUZHA
APPELLANT/S:
MOLLY @ REMA AGED 37, D/O.NARAYANAN,, RESIDING AT THEVARKUNNEL HOUSE,, KUNDALAMPARA KARA, KATTAPPANA VILLAGE.
BY ADVS. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH ARAYAKUNNEL SRI.VARGHESE PARAMBIL.
RESPONDENT/S:
V.K.VIJAYAN, AGED 42 S/O.KOCHUKUTTAN, RESIDING AT VATHUKATTU HOUSE,, ARAKULAM KARA, IN ARAKULAM VILLAGE.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.T.I.ABDUL SALAM R1 BY ADV. SRI.C.K.VIDYASAGAR
THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Mat.Appeal 111 of 2006 ..2..
JUDGMENT
VINOD CHANDRAN,J.
A troubled marriage, which ended in
an application for divorce was allowed by the
Family Court. The impugned order is the divorce granted by the Family Court, challenged by the wife. The allegations in the petition filed by the husband/the respondent were as to the constant cruelty, the husband was subjected to at the hands of
the wife, as also the desertion of the wife.
side of the husband and RWs 1 to 4 were examined on behalf of the wife. The husband
deposed in accordance with his pleadings. The husband had categorically stated that from the beginning, the wife was inimical towards his parents. On the wife constantly picking quarrels with the mother-in-law, the husband
Mat.Appeal 111 of 2006 ..3..
was forced to move from his parental home and
take residence in the quarters of the K.S.E.B, where he was gainfully employed. Even when they were living in the quarters, the wife picked up frequent quarrels with neighbours and also did not properly take care of their only daughter. The husband was
then forced to bring his mother to the quarters to look after the child, when the wife again started picking up quarrels with the mother-in-law. The wife was also in the habit of physically assaulting the husband, which allegation was fully supported by the daughter, who was 15 years of age at the time of examination as PW2.
version of PW2, the daughter, from the
impugned order to fully support the allegations of violence and cruelty as
Mat.Appeal 111 of 2006 ..4..
against the father. The daughter has categorically stated about the physical cruelty inflicted on her father by the mother. The mother was also indifferent to
the daughter, is the deposition. The
allegations of the wife regarding she having been kept without food by the mother-in-law were specifically denied. The daughter also stated that the father was caring towards her and had looked after her in all these years. The mother had also willingly parted custody of the child to the father.
indicated that she willingly parted custody of the child to the husband. The wife though deposed in accordance with her objections,
was unable to prove any of these. The
cross-examination of the husband and the daughter also did not evoke any doubt in the
Mat.Appeal 111 of 2006 ..5..
mind of the court regarding the categoric
allegations levelled by the father and daughter against the wife/mother. The wife's categoric contention was that the husband was motivated by malafides raised on the ground that the husband lost interest in her after getting employment in the KSEB. However, it was brought out on evidence that at the time of marriage he had already been issued with the appointment order and he joined, four
days after the marriage.
circumstances having gone through the entire
order, we are of the opinion that it requires no interference at our hands. We also notice that a maintenance order issued in favour of the wife was left undisturbed by the Family Court. Rightly so.
Mat.Appeal 111 of 2006 ..6..
We dismiss this appeal, leaving the
parties to suffer their respective costs.
Sd/-
K.VINOD CHANDRAN
JUDGE
Sd/-
V.G.ARUN
JUDGE
SB/13/11/2019
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Family Court erred in granting a divorce decree based on allegations of cruelty and desertion.
Whether the evidence adduced justifies interference with the Family Court's decree of divorce.
MOLLY @ REMA
V.K.VIJAYAN
K.VINOD CHANDRAN
V.G.ARUN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
