The Madras High Court recently criticised an order passed by a Family Court, refusing to grant divorce to the husband on the ground of wife’s adultery and remarking that the husband, by not taking the wife to his place of employment, had enabled the adultery.

The bench of Justice GR Swaminathan and Justice MD Sumathi held that while some radical feminists might applaud the order of the Family Court, it could not subscribe to such a view.

The bench held that it is not possible for a husband to always take the wife along to the place of employment.

The Family Court had noted that if the husband was living jointly with the wife and satisfying her sexual desire, he could have pleaded adultery as a ground for divorce. But, according to the Family Court, the husband failed to take his wife with him, and it was highly impractical for anyone to overcome the impulse of sexual desire. Thus, the Family Court refused to grant him a divorce on that ground.




While the High Court disagreed with the approach of the Family Court, it noted that the parties had been living separately for 16 years.

The court noted that the wife had not taken any step for rejoining or sent a formal letter to the husband.

The court was thus satisfied that the relationship between the parties had broken beyond repair. The court noted that continuation of such marriage would only mean subjecting the parties to cruelty.

Thus, the court granted a decree of divorce. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the court also directed the husband to pay Rs. 7 lakh to the wife as alimony.