Legal Issue
The Kerala High Court examined whether a husband can be denied a decree of divorce merely because the wife expresses her willingness to resume cohabitation, despite repeated and unsuccessful attempts at reconciliation.
Background
The parties, belonging to different religions, had married under the Special Marriage Act after agreeing to respect each other’s religious beliefs. Over time, matrimonial disputes arose, prompting the husband to file a petition before the Family Court seeking dissolution of marriage.
The husband alleged that the wife had departed from their understanding of leading a secular married life, frequently displayed unreasonable anger, neglected their child, and caused him emotional distress. He further alleged that he faced harassment from the wife’s family, became estranged from his own relatives, and was subjected to serious accusations, including an allegation that he had an illicit sexual relationship with his own mother.
The wife denied these allegations and filed a petition seeking restitution of conjugal rights. She claimed that she was the victim of harassment, disputed the husband’s claims regarding gold ornaments, and maintained that she wished to continue the marriage.
The Family Court granted a decree of divorce in favour of the husband and dismissed the wife’s petition for restitution of conjugal rights. Aggrieved by the decision, the wife filed an appeal before the High Court.
Court’s Decision
A Division Bench of Justice J. Nisha Banu and Justice Sobha Annamma Eapen dismissed the wife’s appeal and upheld the decree of divorce.
The Court noted that several attempts had been made to reconcile the parties through mediation and counselling, including sessions conducted by the Kerala State Legal Services Authority (KeLSA). However, every effort failed.
The counselling report revealed that although the parties continued to reside in the same house after the divorce decree, they were no longer living together as husband and wife. While the husband had no objection to the wife residing in the same house, he clearly stated that he was unwilling to continue the marital relationship or recognise her as his wife.
The Court also considered the psychological assessment of the wife, which indicated that her insistence on preserving the marriage appeared to stem from feelings of isolation and lack of family support.
After re-evaluating the pleadings and evidence, the Court concluded that the marriage had irretrievably broken down in substance and that the husband’s consistent stand against reconciliation could not be ignored.
Observation
The Court observed that a spouse cannot be denied divorce merely because the other spouse expresses a willingness to resume cohabitation. When repeated reconciliation efforts have failed and one spouse remains firm that reunion is no longer possible, such willingness alone is insufficient to refuse a decree of divorce.
Case Title: A v. B.
