Back
2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 27321
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
A. Muhamed Mustaque, SOPHY THOMAS, JJ
MISRIYA P.P., – Appellant
Versus
SAJIR P.K., – Respondent
Mat.Appeal/381/2021
K.SIJU KAMALASANAN, SHANAVAS NALAKATH, RANDUPURAYIL ANJANA KANNATH, RAJESH V.NAIR, R.PARTHASARATHY
A valid Khula can terminate a Muslim marriage when preceded by failed attempts at reconciliation.
Headnote:
Divorce - Marriage Dissolution - Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act - Family Courts Act Section 7(b) - Court validated the self-pronounced Khula by wife, concluding marriage termination.
Fact of the Case:
The wife appealed against the dismissal of her divorce petition under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, citing a unilateral Khula pronouncement after failed reconciliation attempts.
Issues: Whether the wife's pronouncement of Khula is valid and terminates the marriage in light of prior mediation attempts.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the Khula was validly pronounced after failure of reconciliation, satisfying personal law requirements for marital dissolution.
Final Decision: The marriage is declared terminated due to the pronounced Khula by the appellant.
J U D G M E N T
A.Muhamed Mustaque, J.
The parties are present. We interacted with them. The respondent admitted that he has received a communication pronouncing Khula by the appellant. The appellant submitted that she is not willing to reconsider her decision to revoke Khula and to live with the respondent, though an offer has been made from his side for resumption of cohabitation.
2. This appeal is at the instance of the wife challenging dismissal of the petition for divorce initiated under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act , 1939. The parties were married on 27.09.2014 in accordance with the personal law applicable to Muslim community. In their wedlock, a boy child was born. It seems the parties are living separately for the last more than five years.
3. In the Family Court, the husband filed a counter claim for restitution of conjugal rights. That has been allowed. No challenge has been preferred against that order. The wife has come up with this appeal challenging dismissal of the petition for divorce.
4. Pending appeal, the appellant-wife invoked extra judicial divorce and pronounced Khula. Consequently, she unilaterally terminated the marriage. A copy of the Khula has been placed before us. As seen from the Khula produced before us, there was conciliation and mediation before the Family Court and the parties could not arrive at a settlement. A Division Bench of this Court in X and others vs. Y and others reported in 2021 (2) KHC 709 gave necessary directions in regard to the nature of pronouncement of Khula and requirements for its validity.
5. In view of the fact that Khula was preceded by an attempt for settlement and that was failed, we are satisfied that Khula has been pronounced in accordance with the personal law. Thus we are of the view that recording this Khula, this Mat.Appeal can be disposed of. We make it clear that we have not decided the appeal on merits. We, invoking the power of the Family Court under Section 7 (b) of the Family Courts Act , hereby declare that the marriage solemnised between appellant and respondent on 27.09.2014 has come to an end on pronouncing Khula by the appellant.
This appeal is disposed of recording the extra judicial divorce invoked by the appellant. No costs.
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE
