SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 49170

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Devan Ramachandran, M.B. SNEHALATHA, JJ
DAYANA SEBASTIAN – Appellant
Versus
TIEL JOSEPH – Respondent
RAT.APPEAL NO. 191 OF 2020 | O.P.No.2254/2014



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI. JOENSICIN GOMEZ, SRI. JOSH JOSEPH
For the Respondents: SRI. GEORGE MATHEW, SRI. PRAVEEN S, SMT. ELSA DENNY PINDIS, SRI. M. D. SASIKUMAR, SRI. DIPU KDGS, SRI. STEPHY K REGI

Mutual consent is valid for divorce under the Divorce Act when parties demonstrate irretrievable breakdown without collusion.

Headnote:(A) Divorce Act, 1869 - Section 10(1)(x) and Section 10A - Appeal filed by wife challenging divorce decree granted by Family Court - Both parties settled their disputes through mediation, leading to filed memorandum - Court finds the marriage irretrievably broken down since 2012, with no reunion possibility - Court allows marriage dissolution by mutual consent, waiving the cooling off period. (Paras 1-9)

(B) Divorce by mutual consent - This court recognizes that mutual consent is a fit ground for dissolution in cases where reconciliation is impracticable. (Paras 4-6)

Facts of the case:
The appellant, a wife, appeals the Family Court’s divorce decree citing irreconcilable issues, while the parties had previously agreed on settlement terms through mediation.

Findings of Court:
The court finds the marriage has irretrievably broken down and grants divorce by mutual consent, reflecting the genuine agreement of both parties.

Issues: Whether the marriage had irretrievably broken down to warrant divorce by mutual consent; validity of the memorandum of settlement.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the necessity of mutual consent in divorce proceedings, particularly when evidencing settled disputes through mediation and lack of collusion.

Result: The marriage is dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent.

Table of Content
1. decree of divorce challenged by wife. (Para 1)
2. parties settled disputes through mediation. (Para 2 , 5)
3. settlement agreement complies with legal standards. (Para 3 , 4 , 6)
4. court waives cooling-off period for divorce. (Para 7)
5. divorce granted; previous court judgment set aside. (Para 8)
6. dissolution of marriage under mutual consent. (Para 9 , 10)

JUDGMENT

M.B,Snehalatha, J

Mat.A No.191/2020 is an appeal filed by the appellant/wife challenging the decree of divorce granted by the Family Court, Ernakulam under Section 10 (1)(x) of the Divorce Act .

2. Today, when this appeal came up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for both sides submitted that the entire disputes between the parties have been settled in the mediation held under the aegis of Mediation Centre, Ernakulam and a memorandum of settlement agreement has been filed before this Court.

3. We have examined the memorandum of settlement agreement and we notice that it has been signed by the parties and subscribed by their counsel. The terms of the agreement are lawful and therefore, the settlement arrived at by the parties is accepted.

4. In view of the settlement arrived at by the parties, appellant and respondent have filed a petition under Section 10A of the Divorce Act , 1869 for dissolution of marriage by mutual consent, wherein they have stated that they have mutually agreed and decided for dissolution of marriage voluntarily. Further it is stated that there is no collusion in filing Mat.A No.191 of 2020 2025 : KER: 65584 the petition under Section 10A of the ; that the spouses are living separately from 2012 onwards; and there is no marital relationship between them and therefore, they seek divorce by mutual consent.

5. Both parties have affirmed that the entire disputes between the parties have been settled in terms of the joint petition filed by the parties-

6. We are convinced that the marriage between the spouses has been irretrievably broken down and they are living separately from 2012 onwards and there is no possibility of reunion and divorce is the viable option and all the attempts of reunion have been failed. We are also convinced that the parties have voluntarily filed the petition under Section 10A of the Divorce Act and there is no collusion between the parties and this Court is satisfied that the consent was not obtained through fraud or coercion.

7. We are of the view that this is a fit case to grant divorce by mutual consent on the application filed under Section 10A of the Divorce Act by waiving the cooling off period as the marriage is irretrievably broken.

8. Accordingly, I.A.No.2/2025 filed under Section 10A of the Divorce Act is allowed and Mat.A No.191/2020 stands disposed of. The judgment and decree of Family Court, Ernakulam in O.P.No.2254/2014 granting divorce on the ground of cruelty is hereby set aside.

9. The marriage between the appellant and the respondent is Mat.A No.191 of 2020 2025 : KER: 65584 dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent under Section 10A of the Divorce Act , 1869 with effect from today.

10. The parties are directed to act implicitly in terms of the memorandum of mediation settlement agreement and joint petition, which do form part of the judgment.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top