LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/usha-uday-khiwansara-vs-uday-kumar-jethamal-khiwansara-20180717/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Civil · Reportable judgment

Usha Uday Khiwansara vs Uday Kumar Jethamal Khiwansara

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
17 July 2018
Case No.
Civil Appeal No. 6861 of 2018
Result
Disposed
Bench
Uday Umesh Lalit, Abhay Manohar Sapre
Citation
[2018] 7 S.C.R. 1112 : 2018 INSC 618
Supreme Court Reports [2018] 7 S.C.R. 1112 : 2018 INSC 618
Headnote

Matrimonial laws: Dissolution of marriage – In exercise of power u/Art.142 of the Constitution – On facts, grant of ex parte divorce decree in favour of husband by the High Court – Challenge to, by the wife – On appeal, held: Parties have been living separately for last more than a decade and there is no chance of both coming together to continue their marital life, and no issue was born out of wedlock – Furthermore, wife has been ailing for long time and living with her relatives, and has no independent income of her own, whereas her husband is quite resourceful person – In order to ensure that the parties may live peacefully in future, a quietus must be given to all litigations between the parties – In view of the consensus arrived at between the parties, issuance of direction to the husband to pay the wife Rupees thirty lakhs towards permanent alimony and Rupees five lakhs towards medical expenses – Thus, in exercise of power u/Art. 142, marriage is dissolved subject to the fulfillment of the said conditions – Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Constitution of India – Art. 142.

Naveen Kohli v. Neelu Kohli (2006) 4 SCC 558 :

[2006] 3 SCR 53 ; Sanghamitra Ghosh v. Kajal Kumar Ghosh (2007) 2 SCC 220 : [2006] 9 Suppl. SCR 156 – referred to.

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.

Full Judgment Text

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, J. 1. Delay condoned. 2. Leave granted. 3. This appeal is filed by the appellant-wife against the final judgment and order dated 14.08.2014 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Family Court Appeal No.155/2007 whereby the High Court allowed the Family Court Appeal filed by the Respondenthusband. 4. Few facts need to be mentioned to appreciate the short issue involved in the appeal. 5. The appellant is the wife whereas the respondent is the husband. The appellant and the respondent married on 07.02.1992. Unfortun
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

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.

All SC judgments →