In a surprising case from Gujarat, a 23-year-old marriage ended over a long-running disagreement about food habits in the kitchen. The dispute — centred on the wife’s refusal to consume onion and garlic — ultimately led to divorce proceedings that have now been upheld by the Gujarat High Court.

The ruling highlights how persistent domestic differences, even over lifestyle and dietary choices, can escalate into serious marital breakdowns.

What Triggered the Marital Dispute

According to court records, the couple from Ahmedabad married in 2002. The wife followed the Swaminarayan Sampraday, whose followers traditionally avoid onion and garlic.

To accommodate her dietary preference:

• The husband’s mother reportedly cooked separate meals without onion and garlic for the wife.

• Other family members continued to eat regular food containing these ingredients.

Despite this arrangement, disagreements over religious practices and food habits reportedly continued for years, eventually straining the relationship.

High Court Bench Rejects Wife’s Appeal

A division bench comprising Sangeeta Vishen and Nisha Thakore dismissed the woman’s appeal challenging the family court’s divorce order.

The court noted that:

• The wife did not strongly oppose the divorce itself.

• Her primary concern was related to maintenance (alimony).

• Differences over religious practices and food choices were a key source of marital discord.

The High Court therefore upheld the family court’s decision to dissolve the marriage.

Timeline of the Case

• 2002: Couple got married in Ahmedabad.

• 2007: Wife left the matrimonial home with the child after disputes.

• 2013: Husband filed for divorce in family court citing cruelty and desertion.

• May 2024: Family court granted divorce.

• 2026: High Court upheld the divorce order.

Earlier, the husband had also approached the women’s police station alleging harassment and cruelty by the wife.

Maintenance Dispute Took Centre Stage

During the High Court proceedings, the wife stated that she had not received maintenance for 18 months despite the family court’s directions.

Her counsel informed the court that:

• Total pending maintenance: ₹13,02,000

• Interim maintenance already received: ₹2,72,000

• Amount deposited by husband during trial: ₹4,27,000

The High Court directed that:

• The deposited amount be transferred to the wife after verification.

• The husband must deposit the remaining dues with the family court.

• The court will then ensure the money is credited to the wife’s bank account.

Key Takeaway

This unusual case underscores how long-standing domestic incompatibilities — even over everyday matters like food preferences and religious practices — can lead to irreversible marital breakdown when not resolved early.

While the High Court has now settled the divorce aspect, the financial settlement through maintenance remains an important part of ensuring post-divorce support.