Cruelty must be substantiated by credible evidence in divorce proceedings, validating the decision to dissolve a marriage based on such claims.

JUDGMENT

A.M.Shaffique, J.

This appeal is filed by the respondent in O.P.No.

337/2009 of the Family Court at Ettumanoor. The O.P. was filed by the respondent herein seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty. The appellant and the respondent got married on 16.04.1990 as per Christian religious rites and ceremonies. A son was born in the wedlock. The contention urged by the petitioner-wife was that the respondent, her husband, was behaving cruelly towards her and he was a habitual drunkard. When she questioned, she was manhandled. He was associated with goodas and was involved in rioting and gambling. He has illicit relationship with other ladies as well. She also filed a petition under Section 498A , I.P.C., which is pending consideration before the Court below. Alleging cruelty, she has sought for divorce. The respondent denied the allegations.

2. The case was heard along with another case in which the wife claimed recovery of money and gold ornaments. Common evidence was taken in the case. PW1 and PW2 were examined on the side of the petitioner and RW1 and RW2 were examined on the side of the respondent. Exts.A1 to A3 and Exts.B1 to B5 were the documents relied upon by either side.

3. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the allegation of cruelty and torture is absolutely false and there is no evidence to substantiate the above contention. On the other hand, the learned Counsel appearing for the respondent while supporting the judgment submits that enough evidence was adduced to prove the allegation of cruelty.

4. In order to prove cruelty, PW1 and PW2 were examined. PW1 is none other than the petitioner and PW2 is the father of the petitioner. Ext.A2 is the copy of the F.I.R. filed in Crime No.318/08, which apparently is a complaint filed by the wife against her husband, the respondent. PW1 has given evidence narrating the cruelty and torture she has suffered and also the entrustment of money and gold ornaments. The Family Court proceeded on the basis that the version of the petitioner-wife was believable and accordingly granted divorce.

5. There is sufficient evidence in the form of oral testimony of PW1 and PW2 to prove cruelty. The marriage was irretrievably broken and there is no chance for reunion. We do not think that any interference is sought for with reference to the judgment, insofar as the marital tie has already broken.

In the above circumstances, we do not think it necessary to overturn the judgment of the Family Court in exercise of the appellate jurisdiction. This appeal is hence dismissed. No order as to costs.

A.M.SHAFFIQUE JUDGE