It was held by Kerala High Court that “though the photographs may reflect that the couple were in a happy mood, that does not reflect as to how they were living together”
The parties got married on 1.5.1999 and a male child was born in the wedlock on 06.12.2001. They started living separately since 30.12.2005. The contention urged by the petitioner/wife was that all along her husband was demanding her to bring patrimony. She had to suffer cruelty at the hands of the husband on account of such demands. Finally, during 2005, she was severely man handled and she had to leave the matrimonial home.
The wife’s divorce petition was allowed by the Trial Court. She had sought divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion. It was found that the wife was successful in proving cruelty and therefore she was entitled for divorce. It was also found that the husband had deserted the wife and the child for more than two years and therefore the wife was entitled for divorce on the ground of desertion as well.
The Wife alone had been examined before court. Husband denied the aforesaid facts and placed reliance upon certain photographs to prove that the couple had been leading a happy married life. As far as the wife is concerned, her main complaint was that husband was demanding the patrimony all along. That apart, according to Wife, she was subjected to perverted sexual activities by her husband
“Though the photographs may reflect that the couple were in a happy mood, that does not reflect as to how they were living together. At the time of taking the photographs, they seems to be in a happy mood. But that by itself does not mean that the couple was leading a happy married life, and there was no demand for patrimony.”
Having regard to the aforesaid factual situation, when the Family Court had placed reliance upon sufficient material to arrive at a finding that the husband had ill-treated his wife, which amounts to mental and physical cruelty, we do not find any reason to interfere with the said finding of fact. There is no perversity or illegality in the said finding warranting any interference. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and the fact that the matrimonial tie had been irretrievably broken and there is no chance for a re-union, we don’t think it necessary to interfere with the judgment of the Family Court.
The Mat Appeal is dismissed. No costs.
Judgment-Anish Jacob V Rinku Jacob