NARAYANI A/P MARIAPPEN v 1. ) PUVANESVARAN A/L ARIKRISHNAN 2. ) JOTHI LETCHMEY A/P NOOKARAJOO

ka-33-86-12-2023 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 15 October 2025 • KA-33-86-12/2023 • 37 min read

9 cases cited (0 SG, 9 foreign)

Catchwords

FAMILY LAW: Divorce – Irretrievable breakdown of marriage – Adultery and cruelty – Allegation that husband committed adultery with co-respondent – Evidence – Intimate messages and photographs – Whether adultery proved on balance of probabilities – Cruelty – Physical assault and domestic violence – Withdrawal of police report – Whether withdrawal negated fact of cruelty – Constructive desertion – Husband locking wife and child out of matrimonial home – Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976, ss. 53 & 54 FAMILY LAW: Children – Access – Application for overnight access by father – Factors to consider – Welfare of child – Child traumatized by father’s past violence and aggression – Whether overnight access appropriate – Maintenance – Assessment – Husband failing to produce documentary evidence of income – Duty to make full and frank disclosure – Adverse inference – Evidence Act 1950, s. 114(g) – Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976, ss. 88, 92 & 93 FAMILY LAW: Matrimonial property – Division – Matrimonial home registered in husband's sole name – Allegation that property held in trust for parents – Absence of documentary proof regarding parents' contribution – Wife’s contribution – Direct financial contribution via EPF withdrawals for loan instalments – Non-financial contribution to welfare of family – Entitlement to equal division – EPF contributions – Whether matrimonial asset subject to division – Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976, s. 76 – Employees Provident Fund Act 1991, s. 53A FAMILY LAW: Damages – Adultery – Claim against co-respondent – Measure of damages – Domestic violence – Personal injuries – Whether court empowered to award general damages for assault within divorce proceedings – Principles applicable – Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976, s. 58 EVIDENCE: Adverse inference – Non-production of material documents – Husband claiming low income but failing to produce salary slips or bank statements – Husband claiming house paid for by parents but failing to produce transaction records – Presumption that evidence if produced would be unfavourable – Evidence Act 1950, s. 114(g)

Judges (1)

John Lee Kien How @ Mohammad Johan Lee Delivered

Counsel (4)

M. S. Nizam & Co Firm Max Yee & Ang Firm Ang Jun Jia Counsel Petitioner Muhammad Irham Redzuan Counsel Respondent

Parties (3)

Jothi Letchmey a/p Nookarajoo Respondent Narayani a/p Mariappen Petitioner Puvanesvaran a/l Arikrishnan Respondent

Case Significance

NARAYANI A/P MARIAPPEN v 1. ) PUVANESVARAN A/L ARIKRISHNAN 2. ) JOTHI LETCHME... is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated October 15, 2025 (citation: ka-33-86-12-2023). The case was decided by John Lee Kien How @ Mohammad Johan Lee.

What was the outcome of NARAYANI A/P MARIAPPEN v 1. ) PUVANESVARAN A/L ARIKRISHNAN 2. ) JOTHI LETCHME...?

NARAYANI A/P MARIAPPEN v 1. ) PUVANESVARAN A/L ARIKRISHNAN 2. ) JOTHI LETCHME... is a High Court decision dated October 15, 2025. The case was heard by John Lee Kien How @ Mohammad Johan Lee. See the full judgment for details.