1. Transfer petition in divorce proceedings under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Allegations of marital neglect and breach of trust. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 )
Back
Next 
2024 Supreme(SC) 977
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.R. GAVAI, ARAVIND KUMAR, K.V. VISWANATHAN, JJ.
Sapna Negi - Petitioner
Versus
Chaman Singh and Another - Respondents
Transfer Petition (Civil) No.2814 Of 2023
Decided On : 24-10-2024
Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Nishant Kumar, AOR Mr. Gaurav Prakash Pathak, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Nagarkatti Kartik Uday, AOR Mr. Sanidhya Kumar, Adv.
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Nishant Kumar, AOR Mr. Gaurav Prakash Pathak, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Nagarkatti Kartik Uday, AOR Mr. Sanidhya Kumar, Adv.
IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Divorce – A dead marriage must be given a decent quietus.
(2) Power under Article 142(1) of Constitution of India can be exercised by Supreme Court to dissolve a marriage which has lost its vigour beyond salvation.
Headnote:
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 13(1)(i-a) – Constitution of India – Article 142(1) – Divorce – Marriage has irretrievably broken down – Exercise of power under Article 142(1) of Constitution of India is warranted in facts and circumstances of case and also to do complete justice between parties particularly in background that marriage between petitioner and the first respondent has completely failed and parties had not cohabitated from 2019 till date and there being no possibility that parties will cohabitate in future – Continuation of legal relationship would be unjustified and would not subserve interest of parties – Petitioner and first respondent are quite young namely 32 years and 38 years respectively and have future ahead of them – Having regard to fact that petitioner is also gainfully employed in a Government school and earning a reasonable income and keeping in mind financial capability of first respondent-husband to take care of interest of daughter, ends of justice would meet if first respondent is directed to pay permanent alimony of Rs.13,00,000/- in addition to amount of Rs. 7,00,000/- already deposited in a fixed deposit, as it would take care of financial interest of minor daughter – Marriage solemnised between petitioner and first respondent-husband stands dissolved by granting a decree of divorce in exercise of power vested under Article 142(1) of Constitution of India. (Paras 5 and 6)
Facts of the case:
Petitioner-wife is seeking for transfer of the proceedings in HMA No.428 of 2023 titled “Sh. Chaman Singh Vs. Smt. Sapna Negi and another” pending before court of the Principal Judge, Family Courts, Roorkee, Uttarakhand to the Family Court, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi.
Findings of Court:
By securing the interest of the minor daughter of the petitioner and first respondent, the petition HMA No.428 of 2023 titled “Sh. Chaman Singh Vs. Smt. Sapna Negi and another” pending before court of the Principal Judge, Family Courts, Roorkee, Uttarakhand can be disposed of by granting a decree of divorce of the marriage that was solemnised between petitioner and first respondent on 12.05.2013 by allowing the said petition.
Result : Petition allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Husband alleges breach of trust and neglect of marital obligations — Wife contends husband's neglect forced her to reside at her parental home. (Para 3 )
3. Marriage has irretrievably broken down with no possibility of cohabitation — Continuation of legal relationship is unjustified and would be an ordeal for parties. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 )
4. Under Article 142(1) of the Constitution, the Court may dissolve a marriage on the ground of irretrievable breakdown to do complete justice. (Para 5 )
5. Marriage dissolved by granting a decree of divorce under Article 142(1) of the Constitution — Permanent alimony directed for the minor child. (Para 6 )
6. Can the Supreme Court dissolve a marriage on the ground of irretrievable breakdown?
Yes, in exercise of its discretionary power under Article 142(1) of the Constitution of India, the Court can dissolve a marriage on the ground of irretrievable breakdown to do complete justice when the marriage has completely failed and there is no possibility of cohabitation. (Para 5 )
7. What is the scope of the Supreme Court's power under Article 142(1) in matrimonial disputes?
The Court can depart from procedure and substantive laws based on considerations of fundamental, general, and specific public policy to ensure complete justice between the parties. (Para 5 )
8. When is the continuation of a formal legal relationship in a marriage considered unjustified?
When the marriage has irretrievably broken down, the parties have not cohabitated for a significant period, and there is no possibility of future cohabitation. (Para 5 , 6 )
JUDGMENT :
(Aravind Kumar, J.)
1. The Petitioner-wife is seeking for transfer of the proceedings in HMA No.428 of 2023 titled “Sh. Chaman Singh Vs. Smt. Sapna Negi and another” pending before the court of the Principal Judge, Family Courts, Roorkee, Uttarakhand to the Family Court, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi.
2. We have heard the arguments of Shri Gaurav Prakash Pathak appearing for petitioner and Shri Nagarkatti Kartik Uday appearing for respondents. The marriage between the petitioner and respondent came to be solemnised on 12.05.2013 and a daughter, Ms. xxx was born on 18.05.2016.
3. The respondent-husband filed a petition under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for grant of decree of divorce alleging that petitioner had breached the trust and she was already in relationship with the second respondent and despite advice given to her to return to the matrimonial home, she has continued to neglect the family and had failed to discharge her marital obligations. It is also alleged that petitioner-wife having secured a job as a teacher in July, 2022, had completely neglected Respondent-husband. Whereas petitioner-wife contended that on account of the first respondent-husband having neglected the petitioner and her daughter and having failed to take care of them, she was left with no other option but to return to her parental home and she has been residing there from 2019.
4. This Court in order to explore the possibility of the parties arriving at a settlement had referred the matter to the Supreme Court Mediation Centre and report dated 24.07.2024 received from the mediation centre would disclose that mediation had failed. It is pertinent to note at this juncture itself, this Court on 28.08.2024 has recorded that relationship between the petitioner and the first respondent had irretrievably broken down. It is in this background, the matter came to be referred to mediation, which did not fructify into settlement and parties present before the Court have also fairly admitted that the marriage has irretrievably broken down.
5. In the factual scenario explained herein above we are of the considered view that the exercise of the power under Article 142(1) of the Constitution of India is warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case and also to do complete justice between the parties particularly in the background of this Court having noted herein above that marriage between the petitioner and the first respondent has completely failed and the parties had not cohabitated from 2019 till date and there being no possibility that the parties will cohabitate in future. Hence, continuation of the legal relationship would be unjustified and would not subserve the interest of the parties. Under similar circumstances, this Court in Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 544, has held that this Court can depart from the procedure as well as the substantive laws, as long as the decision is exercised based on considerations of fundamental, general and specific public policy. It is also held that in exercise of power under Article 142(1) of the Constitution of India, this Court has the discretion to dissolve the marriage on the ground of its irretrievable breakdown, and this discretionary power is to be exercised to do ‘complete justice’ to the parties, when this Court is satisfied that the facts established show that the marriage has completely failed and there is no possibility that the parties will cohabit together, and continuation of the formal legal relationship is unjustified.
6. Hence, we are of the view that continuation of the proceedings before the Trial Court could only be an ordeal which both the parties will have to undergo and we are of the considered view that marriage between the petitioner and respondent having irretrievably broken down, exercise of power by this Court under Article 142 of Constitution of India is called for in the facts and circumstances obtained and also keeping in mind
