Hindu Marriage Act, 1955:
s. 13(1)(ia) – Petition seeking divorce – By husband – Trial Court passed decree of divorce – High Court set aside the decree – Appeal to Supreme Court – Held: The High Court has brushed aside the allegations as wear and tear of marriage – But the relationship between the parties has deteriorated to such an extent that continuity of marriage is fruitless – Though the ground of ‘irretrievable breakdown of marriage’ has not been inserted as a ground for divorce under the Act, in exercise of jurisdiction u/Art.
142 of the Constitution, in order to put a quiet us to the dispute, decree of divorce is granted – Constitution of India – Art. 142.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. The High Court appears to have brushed aside the allegations of extra marital affairs as also of a child out of the wedlock as part of the wear and tear of marriage and as “inflamed passions.” However, the fact remains that the the relationship between the parties appears to have deteriorated to such an extent that both parties see little good in each other, an aspect supported by the counselor’s report; though the respondent insists that she wants to stay with the appellant. Matrimonial relationships require adjustments from both sides, and a willingness to stay together. The mere say of such willingness would not suffice. [Para 13][174-B-D]
2. It is no doubt true that the divorce legislations in India are based on the ‘fault theory’, i.e., no party should take advantage of his/her own fault, and that the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage, as yet, has not been inserted in the divorce law, despite a debate on this aspect by the Law Commission in two reports. The provisions of Article 142 of the Constitution provide a unique power to the Supreme Court, to do “complete justice” between the parties, i.e., where at times law or statute may not provide a remedy, the Court can extend itself to put a quietus to a dispute in a manner which would befit the facts of the case. Where a marriage is found to be a dead letter, the Court has exercised its extraordinary power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to bring an end to it. [Paras 14, 19 and 21][174-E; 175-G; 176-C]
3. Not only is the continuity of the marriage in the present case is fruitless, but it is causing further emotional trauma and disturbance to both the parties. This is even reflected in the manner of responses of the parties in the Court. The sooner this comes to an end, the better it would be, for both the parties. [Para 20][175-G; 176-A]
4. An end to this marriage would permit the parties to go their own way in life after having spent two decades battling each other, and there can always be hope, even at this age, for a better life, if not together, separately. Thus, exercising jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, a decree of divorce is granted and the marriage inter se the parties is dissolved forthwith. [Paras 22 and 23][176-D-E]
7. The maintenance of Rs.7,500 per month should be continued to be paid by the appellant to the respondent, and it is open for the parties to move appropriate proceedings for either enhancement of this maintenance or reduction and cessation thereof. We only hope that this aspect can also be reconciled between the parties once a decree of divorce is granted. [Para 24][176-F-G]
R. Srinivas Kumar v. R. Shametha (2019) 9 SCC 409 – relied on.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.