High Court Dissolves Marriage Citing Mental Cruelty
In a recent judgment delivered by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras on 25th April
2025, the matrimonial dispute between U. Sridhar and S. Yamini came under
detailed judicial scrutiny. This case involved two cross-petitions one by the
husband seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty, and the other by the wife
seeking restitution of conjugal rights. Both petitions were originally dismissed by
the Additional Family Court, Coimbatore, which instead granted judicial
separation under Section 13A of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Dissatisfied with
this outcome, the husband approached the High Court through Civil
Miscellaneous Appeals.
The marriage between the parties, solemnized on 6th June 2011, was a second
marriage for both. According to the husband, the relationship was marred by
constant quarrels, mental harassment, and even physical abuse. He alleged that
his wife humiliated him in public, scratched his face, and abused his aged parents.
Additionally, she filed a police complaint based on unfounded suspicions about his
fidelity, further tarnishing his dignity. However, the Family Court rejected his
plea, stating that the evidence submitted did not meet the legal standard to
constitute cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia).
On the other hand, the wife’s petition for restitution was also denied. Despite her
initial claim of wanting to resume matrimonial life, she made a notable admission
in court by agreeing to hand over the custody of their minor child to the husband
without demanding visitation rights. This, in the Court's view, was indicative of a
lack of genuine interest in reconciling. Given that the couple had been living
separately since 2013, and had exchanged serious mutual allegations, the Court
observed a complete breakdown of the marriage.
What further complicated the legal terrain was the Family Court’s decision to
grant judicial separation even in the wife’s petition for restitution, something that
falls outside the scope of Section 13A. The High Court pointed out this procedural
irregularity and emphasized that the Family Court should have limited itself to
adjudicating only the reliefs sought.
In its final analysis, the High Court found the husband’s claims of mental cruelty
to be credible and well-supported. The wife’s persistent verbal abuse, unfounded
allegations, and pressure tactics such as lodging baseless complaints constituted
mental cruelty. The Court also referenced landmark Supreme Court cases
including Samar Ghosh v. Jaya Ghosh and Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan,
affirming that long-standing separation and emotional trauma could amount to
cruelty justifying divorce.
As a result, the High Court overturned the Family Court’s judgment. It granted a
decree of divorce to the husband, officially dissolving the marriage. The petition
for restitution filed by the wife was dismissed. Furthermore, the maintenance
granted to the wife and the minor daughter was enhanced from ₹30,000 to
₹40,000 per month, taking into account the child’s age and current expenses. The
case highlights not only the delicate nature of matrimonial disputes but also
underscores the importance of courts strictly adhering to statutory provisions
while ensuring justice is served in emotionally and legally complex matters.