Balasingham v. Kalaivany – sllr 1986 volume 2 page 378

In the case between Balasingham (appellant) and Kalaivany (respondent), the issue concerned the cancellation of a maintenance order under Section 5 of the Maintenance Ordinance based on the allegation that the respondent, the wife, was “living in adultery.” The court determined that isolated acts of adultery do not fall within the meaning of “living in adultery” as required by the statute; rather, evidence must establish a continuous course of adulterous conduct contemporaneous with the application for cancellation. The findings established that, although the respondent engaged in brief adulterous behavior, there was insufficient proof of her living in adultery at the relevant time. As a result, the request for cancellation was denied, upholding the statutory requirement that ongoing adult