Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 33820
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Sathish Ninan, J
RAKESH PRABHA – Appellant
Versus
SREEJAMOL – Respondent
Mat.Appeal No.877 of 2019|Mat.Appeal No.878 of 2019|Mat.Appeal No.859 of 2019|Mat.Appeal No.879 of 2019
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Not Provided
For the Respondents: Not Provided
The court recognized long-term separation and lack of reconciliation as valid grounds for divorce, prioritizing the stability and best interests of the child in custody matters.
Headnote:(A) Family Law - Matrimonial disputes - Dissolution of marriage - Grounds of mental cruelty and desertion established due to long separation - Alimony and custody rights addressed - Court favored the husband based on established facts and circumstances. (Paras 16, 17)
(B) Child Custody - Best interests of the child considered due to the child's long-term living situation and current environment. (Paras 13, 14)
Facts of the case:
The husband appeals against Family Court decisions regarding divorce, return of gold ornaments, and custody of the child following separation. Claims for return of personal items and financial contributions related to marriage were contested. (Paras 1-6)
Findings of Court:
The husband entitled to divorce as the marriage was beyond repair; custody granted to the husband, with visitation allowed for the wife; obligations regarding the 'Thali' chain were clarified. (Paras 16-17)
Issues: The primary issues were whether the marriage should be dissolved based on longstanding separation and allegations of cruelty and if custody should remain with the husband given the child's established circumstances. (Paras 16, 13)
Ratio Decidendi: The court's reasoning emphasized the significance of long-term separation during which the relationship was considered irreparably damaged and the importance of maintaining the child's stable living condition. (Paras 16, 14)
Result: Appeals allowed with specific provisions for divorce, property return, and custody arrangements.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of appeals regarding marital disputes (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. consideration of child custody and its implications (Para 9 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. claims for gold ornaments and financial contributions evaluated (Para 10 , 11 , 15) |
| 4. legal grounds for granting divorce established (Para 16) |
| 5. final decisions and orders of the court articulated (Para 17) |
Sathish Ninan, J.
These appeals are by the husband, challenging the judgments of the Family Court in proceedings inter se the wife.
2. Mat.Appeal No.877 of 2019 arise from O.P.No.1216 of 2013. The original petition was one filed by the husband against the wife, seeking dissolution of marriage. The original petition was dismissed by the Family Court.
3. Mat.Appeal No.878 of 2019 arise from O.P.No.1217 of 2013. The original petition was filed by the husband against the wife, seeking return of 'Thali'. The original petition was dismissed by the Family Court.
4. Mat.Appeal No.859 of 2019 arise from O.P.No.980 of 2014. The original petition was one filed by the wife against the husband, seeking return of gold ornaments and money. The original petition was decreed in part.
5. Mat.Appeal No.879 of 2019 arise from O.P.No.801 of 2014. The original petition was filed by the wife against the husband, seeking custody of the minor child born in the wedlock. The original petition was allowed.
6. The marriage between the parties was solemnised on 21.10.2010. A daughter was born in the wedlock. At the time of marriage, the husband was a constable in CRPF and the wife was working abroad. According to the wife, at the time of marriage she was provided with 29 sovereigns of gold ornaments. She had, from out of her salary, provided the husband an amount of Rs.6,50,000/-. The parties fell apart. The wife seeks for return of the gold ornaments and money. She also seeks for custody of the minor child.
7. The husband contended that the wife refused to stay in the matrimonial home along with his parents and his sister, who was deaf-and-dumb. The marriage was on 21.10.2010 and they resided together till 24.11.2010, when she went abroad to resume her job. Thereafter, she returned for delivery. A child was born on 25.07.2011 and she again went to rejoin her job on 29.08.2011. The wife never cared to look after the family. On such allegations, the husband sought for divorce on the ground of mental cruelty and desertion. He also claimed return of the 'Thali' weighing 34 grams.
8. The Family Court held that the mother is entitled for the custody of the child. With regard to the claim for gold and money by the wife, the Family Court granted a decree for 15 sovereigns of gold ornaments and for Rs.6,50,000/-. The original petitions filed by the husband, seeking return of 'Thali' and for divorce, were dismissed.
9. We have heard the learned counsel on either side.
10. With regard to the claim for gold and money, the wife claimed that at the time of marriage she had 29 sovereigns of gold ornaments out of which 21 sovereigns were misappropriated by the husband. The fact that the wife had 29 sovereigns of gold ornaments at the time of marriage is evident in Ext.B1 extract of the marriage register from SNDP Yogam. The wife must have had 3 to 4 sovereigns of gold ornaments with her for her daily wear. The husband claims that 10 sovereigns of gold ornaments were returned by him to the wife. To substantiate the same, he relies on Ext.A7 receipt issued by the wife. Therein, the wife has acknowledged that on 31.08.2012, she has received four small bangles, one necklace and two small “കകാപ പ ”(ring). Therefore, the claim that 10 sovereigns were returned to the wife, is probable. The Family Court has granted a decree to the wife for remaining 15 sovereigns. On the materials, we find that the decree is based on materials and is only to be upheld.
11. It is the claim of the wife that an amount of Rs.6,50,000/- was given to the husband on various occasions. The claim is that such funds were provided from her salary. Ex
