The Court said that it is a common practice for a son in an Indian family to live with his parents even after marriage.

A husband can be granted divorce from his wife for subjecting him to mental cruelty if she forces him to get separated from his parents and also calls him a 'coward and unemployed,' the High Court held.

The Court said that it is a common practice for a son in an Indian family to live with his parents even after marriage and if his wife makes any attempt to separate him from his parents, there should be some justifiable reason for that.

"Indian culture nurtures the concept of pious obligation of the son to maintain his parents. If a wife makes an attempt to deviate the son from the normal practice and normal custom of the society, she must have some justifiable reason for that. The wife wanted the husband to get separated from his family. It is not common practice for a son in India to get separated from parents at the instance of the wife," the bench noted.

In the instant case, the bench noted that there were no 'justifiable reason' for the wife to ask the husband to get separated, except instances of clash of ego on trifle domestic issues and problems related to fulfilment of financial requirements. It noted that the husband had moved out of his parent's house in a rented one only for the sake of his peaceful matrimonial life.

"Thus, the desire of appellant to have separate residence with her husband away from in-laws is not based on justifiable reasons, as such it amounts to cruelty. Normally no husband would tolerate such acts of wife and no son would like to be separated from his parents and other family members. The persistent effort of the wife to constrain the husband to be separated from the family would be torturous for the husband," the bench opined.

The bench was hearing a plea filed by a wife challenging the May 25, 2009 order of a family court in Pashim Midnapur granting divorce to the husband on the ground of cruelty. The family court had dissolved the July 2, 2001 marriage of the couple.

It was the husband's contention that his wife called him a 'coward and unemployed' and kept on picking quarrels on petty issues only to get him separated from his parents.

The bench noted several instances of rude behaviour on the part of the wife including her belligerent attitude towards the husband and his family.

"She expressed in her personal diary that 'I hate that coward to whom I am going to marry' and that ‘she had no consent to marry to unemployed person like him and was tried to stop this marriage as she wanted to marry elsewhere, even after finalization of this marriage but her parents forcibly married her to petitioner’. It indicates that she was not happy with her marriage as she stated that ‘she wanted to marry elsewhere’. Despite that husband tried his level best to accommodate with her," the bench noted.

The Court further noted that the wife had filed a false complaint against the husband which cost him his government job.

"After hearing about his service, she stated that there will be no compromise and she will not let him join his service. These facts amount to mental cruelty on husband," the bench held.

Long separation, mental and physical torture, unwillingness of party to live together, has left no scope to repair their marital bond and in such a situation, the marriage has become a fiction though supported by a legal tie, the Court said.

By refusing to sever that tie, the law in such cases, does not serve the sanctity of marriage; on the contrary, it shows scant regard for the feelings and emotions of the parties which may lead to mental cruelty.

So the denial to grant a decree of divorce would be disastrous for the parties, the bench opined while dismissing the wife's appeal.