Madhya Pradesh High Court dissolves 14-year marriage over ‘repeated desertion’ by wife, grants Rs 25 lakh alimony

Background

• The marriage between the couple was solemnised in 2011 as per Hindu rites and customs.
• The husband alleged that his wife is suffering from mental ailment due to which she gets annoyed, frustrated and angry without any reason.
• It was further alleged that the parents of the wife, despite being aware of her mental illness, got her to be married with the appellant.
• It was claimed that the wife along with her younger daughter left her matrimonial house taking away all her belongings and thereby deserted the husband.
• The husband alleged that his wife left her matrimonial home several times.
• Being aggrieved by the repeated abandonment, the husband filed a suit for divorce, which was dismissed by the family court.
• Therefore, the husband approached the high court against the dismissal of his plea.

Court’s observation

• The Supreme Court in Rakesh Raman v. Kavita 2023 has observed that long separation, in absence of cohabitation and complete breakdown of all meaningful bonds and existing bitterness between husband and wife, has to be read as ‘cruelty’.
• Family court has overlooked the fact that the wife was non-committal towards the marriage and refused to cohabit with the husband continuously which resulted into mental agony.
• The family court also failed to appreciate one important fact that due to such mental agony caused by the wife towards the husband, he was unable to carry out his day-to-day activities unhindered.
• The wife also sowed the seed of fear in the mind of appellant that at any time she may file a false complaint against him and his family members which would defame them in the society and would cause indelible and irreparable mental harassment.
• The wife has continuously deserted the appellant on several occasions, due to which the marriage between them has suffered to the extent of irretrievable breakdown.
• It is noticeable that the relationship between the parties has evidently grown sour beyond the point of return and such a long period of separation has turned these differences irreconcilable.
• It is unfortunate that the parties have already spent a considerable long period of their adult lives fighting marital battles in the courtrooms.
• We are inclined to allow the appeal and grant divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage.
• So far as the question of grant of permanent alimony is concerned, no application has been moved by the respondent-wife seeking maintenance/permanent alimony.
• However, when the parties are suffering on account of non-filing of applications, the court should suo motu exercise powers.
• The family court while determining the amount of interim maintenance to the wife analysed the assets, liabilities and income of the husband and upon considering the overall source of his income, the amount of Rs 20,000 per month was fixed as interim maintenance.
• To avoid multiplicity of proceedings and overlapping maintenance orders under different statutes, it would be appropriate to convert the monthly maintenance into permanent alimony or one time settlement of financial claims between the parties, with an intention to secure a long term financial stability in one consolidated determination.
• Looking at the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice, we consider it to be just and proper to allow permanent alimony to the tune of Rs 25 lakhs in favour of respondent-wife, payable by the appellant-husband.