Wife’s Claim For Separate Residence Under ‘Justified Circumstances’ Not Cruelty: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has observed that a wife’s claim for separate residence under “justified circumstances” cannot be term as an act of cruelty to the husband.

“There may be myriad situations such as differences with the in-laws, her own work commitments or difference of opinion which may make her demand for separate accommodation justified for survival of the marriage. Where there exist certain justifiable reasons, claim for a separate residence per se cannot be termed as an act of cruelty,” a division bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna said.

However, the court added that in the Indian context, where the husband has chosen to be in a joint family with his parents, he cannot be forced to separate from the first day of his marriage “merely on the whims of his wife.”

“A person has equal responsibility towards his parents and his spouse which requires a delicate balance to be maintained between the two,” the court said.

The bench made the observations while dismissing a wife’s appeal challenging the family court order granting divorce to the husband on the ground of cruelty and desertion by her under Section 13 (1)(ia) and (ib) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

The parties got married in January 2012, and got separated just after three months.

Upholding the family court order, the court said that not only did the marriage between the parties subsist for barely three months but failed completely on account of deprivation of conjugal rights.

“It may also not be overlooked that such deprivation over a period of more than 12 years itself amounts to mental cruelty as has been observed in the case of Samar Ghosh Vs. Jaya Ghosh (supra),” the court said.

The husband claimed that he was subjected to cruelty by the wife as she refused to settle in the matrimonial home where his parents were residing with him and that she, since beginning, started making a demand for separate accommodation. The bench ruled that the wife was not been able to justify her claim for separate residence.

“The matrimonial relationship needs nurturing, care, compassion, cooperation and adjustments before it can bloom into a full conjugal relationship. Here is a case where barely in three months the appellant decided to walk out of the matrimonial home. None of the grounds as claimed by her have been proved by any evidence whatsoever,” the court said.

It added that the wife withdrew from the husband’s company after three months of marriage without any reason and that she had no intention of resuming her relationship with him.

“We find no merit in the appeal, which along with the pending applications, if any, is hereby dismissed,” the court said.

Advocates for Appellant: Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Durgesh Gupta, Mr. Kamal Pundir, Mr. Kshitiz Mudgal & Ms. Anshul Rajora,

Advocate for Respondent: Mr. Rashid Hashmi, Advocate.

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 948