Mutual consent for divorce was upheld, with the court exercising its powers under Article 142 to dissolve the marriage, setting aside the original decree based on desertion.

JUDGMENT :

VIKRAM NATH, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The present appeal arises out of the impugned order dated 8th August 2024 passed by the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in MATA No. 279 of 2023, whereby the High Court affirmed the decree of divorce granted by the Family Court.

3. The facts giving rise to the present appeal, in brief, are as follows:

3.1. The appellant-wife and the respondent-husband were married on 14th December 2014 at Sambalpur, Odisha.

3.2. At the time of marriage, the appellant-wife was employed with Infosys and was residing in the United States of America. In February 2017, she returned to India and thereafter commenced cohabitation with the respondent-husband in Bangalore, India. Differences subsequently arose between the parties.

3.3. In the year 2021, the appellant-wife was deputed by her employer to the United States and accordingly she travelled abroad.

3.4. On 9th May 2022, the respondent-husband instituted C.P. Case No. 65 of 2022 before the Family Court, Sambalpur under Section 13 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT , 1955 seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of desertion. It was averred that the appellant-wife had left the matrimonial home during the intervening night of 24th–25th January 2020 and had not returned thereafter, thereby deserting the respondent for a continuous period exceeding two years.

3.5. The appellant-wife contested the said proceedings, asserting that she had left the matrimonial home on 19th January 2020 to visit her brother due to an allegedly hostile environment created by the respondent, including demands for money. She further stated that on 20th January 2020, she had transferred a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs only) to the respondent-husband’s account, and denied having deserted the respondent-husband.

3.6. The Family Court, by judgment and order dated 5th August 2023, allowed the petition filed by the respondent-husband and dissolved the marriage by granting a decree of divorce on the ground of desertion.

3.7. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant-wife preferred an appeal before the High Court in MATA No. 279 of 2023.

3.8. The High Court, by the impugned order, dismissed the appeal and affirmed the findings of the Family Court as well as the decree of divorce.

3.9. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the appellant-wife is before this Court.

4. We have heard Mr. Nikhil Goel, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant-wife, and Mr. Rajiv Kumar Choudhry, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-husband.

5. During the course of hearing, learned senior counsel for the appellant-wife submitted that the appellant-wife is agreeable to a decree of divorce by mutual consent. However, it was contended that the decree ought not to be founded on the ground of desertion, as according to the appellant-wife, she had not abandoned the respondent-husband and had left India on account of her professional obligations, while remaining open to communication.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-husband fairly stated that the respondent-husband is also agreeable to the marriage being dissolved by mutual consent, and has no objection to the exercise of this Court’s powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, instead of sustaining the decree on the ground of desertion.

7. It is evident from the record that the parties have been living separately for a considerable length of time. Efforts at reconciliation have not yielded any positive outcome, and both parties have expressed their unequivocal desire to bring the marital relationship to an end. In the circumstances, the marriage has irretrievably broken down, and there remains no scope for restoration of the mat