In matrimonial law, repeated acts of cruelty, even after reconciliation, may justify divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, recognizing mental cruelty includes false accusations and behavioral misconduct.

JUDGMENT

Mat.Appeal Nos.370/2015, 540/2015, & 585/2015

Dated this the 6^th day of August, 2021

Kauser Edappagath, J.

The husband who is the appellant in all the above appeals challenges three verdicts passed against him by two different Family Courts in three separate proceedings.

2. For the sake of brevity, we refer the parties to as “husband” and “wife”. OP No.389/2013, on the file of the Family Court, Muvattupuzha, was instituted by the husband for dissolution of marriage on the ground of adultery and cruelty. It was dismissed as per the judgment dated 7/2/2015. Mat.Appeal No.370/2015 has been filed challenging the said judgment. OP No.29/2013, on the file of the Family Court, Thodupuzha, was instituted by the wife for return of gold ornaments and money. It was allowed in part as per the order dated 30/4/2015. Mat.Appeal No.585/2015 has been filed challenging the said order. OP (G&W) No.17/2014, on the file of the Family Court, Thodupuzha, was instituted by the husband for appointing him as the guardian of the minor child. It was dismissed as per the order dated 30/4/2015. Mat.Appeal No.540/2015 has been filed challenging the said order. Since all the appeals are interconnected, we dispose of them together by this common judgment.

3. The marriage between the husband and wife was solemnized on 23/5/2006 at Sreekrishnaswami Temple, Thodupuzha as per the Hindu religious rites. After the marriage, they resided at the house of the husband at Ernakulam. A child was born in the wedlock on 8/11/2007. The pleadings and evidence on record disclose that the marital relationship between them was not cordial and happy right from the inception. Marital discord developed between them soon after the marriage which was intensified by passage of time. Both accuse each other for the same. The husband filed petitions for divorce on two occasions (OP Nos.270/2008 and 349/2010) and the wife filed a petition for return of gold ornaments and money (OP No.31/2011). Those petitions were withdrawn by them as settled at the intervention of the family members and well wishers. They started to live together again from the month of March, 2012. Still, dispute arose between them. There was even allegation of assault by the husband against the wife demanding dowry resulting in the registration of crime against the husband and his family members u/s 498A and 34 of I.P.C. Thereafter in 2013, the husband instituted OP No.389/2013 for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty and adultery and the wife instituted OP No.29/2013 for return of gold ornaments and money. In 2014, the husband preferred OP (G&W) No. 17/2014 for appointing him as the guardian of the minor daughter. As stated already, OP No.389/2013 as well as OP(G&W) No.17/2014 filed by the husband were dismissed and OP No.29/2013 filed by the wife was allowed in part vide the impugned orders and judgment.

4. We have heard Sri.T.M.Raman Kartha, the learned counsel appearing for the husband and Sri.M.B.Sandeep, the learned counsel appearing for the wife.

5. We will deal with each original petitions separately one by one.

OP No.389/2013

6. This Original Petition has been filed by the husband for dissolution of marriage on the ground of adultery and cruelty. The first respondent is the wife. The second respondent, who remained ex parte, is the alleged adulterer. The definite case of the husband is that right from the inception of marriage, the wife has perpet