1. The wife is in appeal challenging the decree of divorce under S.13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, granted by the Family Court, Vatakara, in OP No.507 of 2015 filed by the husband.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as 'husband' and 'wife'.

3. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 20.05.2011. Divorce was sought for on the ground of cruelty. The husband alleged that, after marriage, the wife turned cruel towards him and his family and she had undergone a prolonged treatment for mental illness. A child was born in the wedlock.

4. The wife filed a counter affidavit, contending that it was the husband and his family, who ill - treated her. She also made allegations of several cruelties from the husband and his mother. Further, during cross - examination, the wife had testified that she was not prepared to continue the marital life with the husband.

5. It is admitted by both sides that while the husband was a PG student in the year 2000 in Mercy College, Vatakara, the wife joined the same college for a degree course; and the parties got acquainted which culminated in an engagement and marriage in 2011. Admittedly, from 2015 onwards, they were living separately and there was no cohabitation. The Family Court granted divorce finding that there was cruelty on the part of the wife.

6. We have heard Sri. Anandanpillai, learned counsel for the appellant - wife; and Sri. M. Promodh Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent - husband.

7. It is not in dispute that the parties have been living separately since 20.08.2015. The marriage took place in 2011 and a boy child was born in the wedlock. While the husband alleged cruelty and mental illness against the wife, she has made the same allegations against the husband and his family members. Though several documents were produced, there is no cogent evidence to prove any cruelty or mental illness as alleged by the husband. Such allegations remained unestablished.

8. Due to strained relationships, they have been living separately since 2015 and both parties do not have a case that there was cohabitation after 2015. From 2015 onwards, the wife is living separately from the husband. Refusal to live with the spouse also amounts to cruelty. In Rakesh Raman v. Kavitha [2023 SCC OnLine SC 497], it has been held that though in a given case, cruelty as a fault may not be attributable to one party alone and hence, despite irretrievable breakdown of marriage, keeping the parties together amounts to cruelty on both sides. Similarly, in Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan [2023 SCC OnLine SC 544], it has been held that where there is irretrievable breakdown of marriage, then, dissolution of marriage is the only solution. In a recent decision of the apex court in Civil Appeal No.5454 of 2023 [2023 LiveLaw (SC) 727], it has been held that keeping the parties together despite irretrievable breakdown of marriage amounts to cruelty on both sides.

9. In the circumstances, though for varying reasons from that held by the Family Court, we do not find any reason to upset the decree of divorce.
Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed. No costs.