Separation For Over 10 Years & No Cohabitation: Kerala High Court Grants Divorce Observing Irretrievable Breakdown Amounts To Cruelty

"Where parties have been living separately for a considerable period with no cohabitation and no steps taken for restitution of conjugal rights, it is evident that the marriage has broken down irretrievably; and keeping parties together in such circumstances amounts to cruelty to both sides." Kerala High Court, in a significant ruling dated July 7, 2026, held that a marriage which has broken down irretrievably due to long-term separation and lack of cohabitation warrants a decree of divorce, as forcing the parties to remain legally wedded under such circumstances amounts to cruelty.

A bench of Justice J. Nisha Banu and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen observed that where the matrimonial bond has effectively ceased to exist for over a decade, dissolution is the only viable solution.

The appellant-wife and respondent-husband were married in September 2006 and have a daughter from the wedlock. The wife approached the Family Court seeking divorce on the grounds of cruelty, alleging that the husband had misrepresented his employment status in Singapore and subjected her to physical assault under the influence of alcohol. The Family Court, Thrissur, dismissed her petition in 2018, finding that she failed to prove the allegations of cruelty and had left the matrimonial home without justifiable cause.

The primary question before the court was whether the appellant was entitled to a decree of dissolution of marriage given the prolonged period of separation. The court was also called upon to determine if the irretrievable breakdown of marriage, coupled with the husband's long-term absence and lack of effort toward reconciliation, could be considered a form of cruelty justifying divorce.

Long Separation Indicates Irretrievable Breakdown Of Matrimonial Bond

The High Court observed that the parties had been living separately since 2015, marking a period of over ten years of separation. The Bench noted that the evidence clearly demonstrated that the matrimonial bond between the husband and wife had come to an end and the relationship had effectively ceased to exist.

Forcing Parties To Remain In Broken Marriage Amounts To Cruelty

Referring to the legal evolution regarding matrimonial disputes, the Court highlighted that keeping parties together despite an irretrievable breakdown of marriage is counterproductive. The Bench relied on the precedent set by the Supreme Court in Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan [2023 SCC OnLine SC 544], which held that dissolution is the only solution when a marriage has broken down irretrievably.

Court Relies On Recent Precedents Regarding Cruelty On Both Sides

The Court further cited the Apex Court’s decision in Rajib Kumar Roy v. Sushmita Saha [2023 KHC 7090], noting that forcing parties to maintain a dead marriage amounts to cruelty on both sides. This principle was reinforced by the Kerala High Court's own recent decision in Suhama Kumari v. Gireesh Babu [2025 KHC OnLine 12268], which emphasized that long separation without cohabitation or steps for restitution of conjugal rights is clear evidence of a broken marriage.

Lack Of Ardent Desire For Reunion Noted By Court

The Bench pointed out that although the respondent-husband had initially expressed a willingness to live with the wife during the initial proceedings, he never filed a petition seeking the restitution of conjugal rights. The Court found that this lack of action indicated the husband did not have an "ardent desire" to live with the appellant.

Husband's Whereabouts Unknown For Several Years

A crucial factor in the Court's decision was that the husband's whereabouts had been unknown for several years. Notice for the appeal had to be served through paper publication as he was not residing at the address provided. The Court observed that as of the date of the judgment, his location remained unknown to the wife, precluding any chance of a reunion.

High Court Interferes With Family Court Order To Grant Relief

In light of the circumstances, the High Court found that the Family Court’s 2018 judgment dismissing the divorce petition was unsustainable. The Bench concluded that since there appeared to be no chance of any reunion between the parties after a decade of separation, it was inclined to interfere with the lower court's decree.

The High Court allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment of the Family Court, Thrissur. Consequently, the marriage between the parties was dissolved by a decree of divorce. The ruling reaffirms that long-term separation and the disappearance of the substratum of a marriage constitute sufficient grounds for the court to grant a divorce to prevent further emotional cruelty.

Date of Decision: 07 July 2026