ARROYO v VASQUEZ (1921)

FACTS:
Plaintiff Mariano and defendant Dolores were married in 1910, and lived in
Iloilo City. They lived together with a few short intervals of separation. On July
4, 1920, defendant Dolores went away from their common home and decided
to live separately from plaintiff. She claimed that she was compelled to leave
on the basis of cruel treatment on the part of her husband. She in turn prayed
for a decree of separation, a liquidation of their conjugal partnership, and an
allowance for counsel fees and permanent separate maintenance. CFI ruled in
favor of the defendant and she was granted alimony amounting to P400, also
other fees. Plaintiff then asked for a restitution of conjugal rights, and a
permanent mandatory injunction requiring the defendant to return to
the conjugal home and live with him as his wife.

ISSUES:
1. WON defendant had sufficient cause for leaving the conjugal home
2. WON plaintiff may be granted the restitution of conjugal rights
or absolute order or permanent mandatory injunction

HELD:
1. The wife had sufficient cause for leaving the conjugal home. Cruelty done
by plaintiff to defendant was greatly exaggerated. The wife was inflicted with
a disposition of jealousy towards her husband in an aggravated degree. No
sufficient cause was present. Courts should move with caution in enforcing the
duty to provide for the separate maintenance of the wife since this recognizes
the de facto separation of the two parties. Continued cohabitation of the pair
must be seen as impossible, and separation must be necessary, stemming
from the fault of the husband. She is under obligation to return to the domicile.

2. On granting the restitution of conjugal rights. It is not within the province

of the courts to compel one of the spouses to cohabit with, and
render conjugal rights to, the other. But we are disinclined to sanction the
doctrine that an order, enforceable by process of contempt, may be entered
to compel the restitution of the purely personal right of consortium. In the
case of property rights, such an action may be maintained. Said order, at best,
would have no other purpose than to compel the spouses to live
together. Other countries, such as England and Scotland have done this with
much criticism. Plaintiff is entitled to a judicial declaration that the defendant
absented herself without sufficient cause and it is her duty to return. She is
also not entitled to support.