Legal Provisions Involved: Sections 10 and 37 of the Divorce Act, 1869.

Judgement by: Kerala High Court.

Judge/Bench: Justice Sathish Ninan and Justice P. Krishna Kumar.

Facts

The couple married in 2003 as per Christian customs. During pregnancy, the wife went to her parental home and, according to the husband, did not return. They lived separately thereafter. Both parties approached the Family Court. 

The husband sought divorce on the ground of desertion, while the wife asked for return of money and gold given at marriage and also claimed past maintenance for herself and their minor child. The Family Court granted divorce and allowed all her claims.

Key Legal Provisions

Sections 10 and 37 of the Divorce Act, 1869.

Issues Raised

Can a wife who has been found guilty of desertion claim past maintenance? How should “desertion” be understood under the Act?

Arguments of the case

The husband argued that once desertion was proved, she should not receive maintenance. The wife pursued her financial claims.

Judgement

The High Court cancelled past maintenance for the wife, holding that desertion without reasonable cause goes against her claim under Section 37. Maintenance for the child and return of gold and money were upheld.

Click here to VIEW the full judgement.