A decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty requires proof based on a clear preponderance of probabilities; mere allegations without corroborative evidence or where testimony is contradicted by other reliable evidence are insufficient to justify dissolution of marriage.

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was made by L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.)

1.This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed in H.M.O.P. No.175 of 2018 on the file of the learned Family Court, Tirunelveli, whereby the petition filed by the appellant-wife seeking dissolution of marriage with the respondent-husband came to be dismissed.

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

Prologue:

3. Marriage, in our constitutional and social framework, is not merely a private contract between two individuals but a foundational institution of the family, resting on mutual trust, companionship and fidelity. Family Courts, when invited either to dissolve or to preserve such a relationship, are required to balance emotional assertions with legal standards, and subjective grievances with objective proof.

4. Mental cruelty is often subtle, and many such acts occur within the privacy of the matrimonial home. At the same time, a decree of divorce cannot be granted on mere allegations or suspicion. It must rest on a clear preponderance of probabilities arising from evidence on record. Equally, a petition cannot be dismissed merely on moral disapproval if the legal ingredients of cruelty stand established. It is in this backdrop that the present appeal has to be considered.

Case of the wife (petitioner / appellant):

5. The case of the wife, as pleaded in the petition in H.M.O.P. No. 175 of 2018 and reiterated in her deposition, is as follows:

The marriage between the wife and the the husband was solemnised on 11.04.2008 at Gopalasamuthiram, in the temple of Lord Palani Andavar, according to Hindu customs and rites. After the marriage, both of them resided in the house of the wife’s grandmother, Subbammal, at Gopalasamuthiram and continued to live there till the end of 2009. The husband was employed in a hotel. According to the wife, he used to spend all his earnings on liquor and was of a highly suspicious nature. After consuming alcohol, he would beat, kick and harass her.

6. In 2010, when the husband was employed in a hotel at Tiruchendur, he took a rented house there and the parties lived together in the said house. During this period, the wife became pregnant. For the purpose of confinement, she was taken back to Gopalasamuthiram and on 09.07.2011, she gave birth to a male child. Thereafter, as the wife did not desire to live in Tiruchendur, they shifted and took a rented house at Palayamkottai, where they resided. A female child was born on 22.04.2014.

7. According to the wife, even after the birth of two children, the husband did not change his behaviour. He continued his suspicious and abusive conduct. It is her case that the husband, under the influence of alcohol, used to sexually harass her in such a manner that even their elder male child, aged about 8 years, could witness the same and ask questions about what was happening. The wife further averred that on 24.07.2018, she lodged a complaint against the husband at the All Women Police Station, Palayamkottai, which is pending enquiry. Enraged by the filing of the said complaint, the husband brutally assaulted her and left the matrimonial home, stating that he would no longer live with her. It is her assertion that the parties have been living separately since then and there is no possib