Date of Judgment:
10th March 2022
Bench:
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.
M.M. Sundresh, J.
Parties:
Appellant – Ajay Kumar Rathee.
Respondents – Seema Rathee.
Subject
The Hon’ble High Supreme Court(hereinafter referred to as ‘Hon’ble Supreme Court’ or ‘the Court’), has held that a daughter who refuses to maintain any relationship with her father is not entitled to receive financial assistance from him for her marriage or education. The Court held that while evaluating the amount to be paid as perpetual alimony to the mother, care shall be exercised to ensure that funds are available if the mother wishes to endorse the daughter.
Legal Provisions
Hindu Marriage ACT, 1955
- Section 9 – which that when either the husband or the wife has withdrawn from the society of the other without reasonable excuse, the aggrieved party may petition the district court for restitution of conjugal rights.
Constitution of India, 1950
- Article 142 – states that In exercising its jurisdiction, the Supreme Court may issue any decree or order necessary to complete justice in any case or matter before it.
BRIEF FACTS
- In this instant case, the husband initially filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights, which the trial court denied. He then filed a petition for dissolution of marriage by divorce, which was granted by the District Judge. The wife filed an appeal against the decision with the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
- Following which the Hon’ble High Court cast aside the lower court's decision, and the husband filed an appeal with the Supreme Court.
- The case of the respondent that she was assaulted by her husband in demand of dowry and respondents failure to provide the same resulted in her being thrown out of her matrimonial home in October 2004, it was further stated that she was mentally and physically harassed by her husband and In-laws.
- The learned District Court found no substantial evidence regarding demand of dowry and thus no reconsideration of the said matter could be possible.
- Numerous efforts at reconciliation were made before the Supreme Court Mediation Centre while the proceedings were pending, but the mediation report was one of failure and the parties were not even capable of sitting across a table and talking, let alone continuing the marriage.
- Following, the aggrieved respondent filed an appeal before the High Court and preferred the special leave petition for resolving the dispute through peaceful mediation.
- Likewise, to which the learned counsels for the respective parties state that the appellant, as well as the respondent, have been staying apart for a long time and the parties thereby will work out a settlement and demand deferment of hearing since the mediation resulted in no agreement between the parties, thus the leave was granted.
ISSUES RAISED
- Whether the daughter stands eligible to claim financial support from the father for education and marriage if she does not wish to maintain any relations with him?
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE RESPONDENTS
- The Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent reported that he was told that the respondent was not opposed to a mutual consent divorce, with the Court exercising its powers under Article 142 of the Indian Constitution without confessing the accusations made by the appellant in the divorce petition.
- Additionally, putting two conditions namely: (a) the maintenance for the last 10 months fixed by the trial Court of Rs.8,000/- per month has not been paid and (b) the sole child-daughter, has got admission to a college and the appellant must bear expenses for her education.
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE APPELLANTS
- The Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant contended that the parties have been staying apart for a long time and them residing under the roof has become impossible due to bitter relations between the husband and the wife.
- Further the Counsels for the appellants gave assurance that the arrears would be cleared in prescribed limitation as well as agreed to attest affidavit regarding salary and private income, simultaneously the respondents also averred to this order.
- Likewise, the Counsels for the appellant to referring to numerous judgments substantiates divorce on the grounds of desertion by the respondents contending that a decree of divorce shall be granted on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown of the marriage.
- Thus pleading the court to invoke its jurisdiction prescribed U/Art. 142 of the Constitution of India.
ANALYSIS BY THE COURT
- The Hon’ble Supreme Courtto provide justice in this instance, the court declared the marriage between the appellant and the respondents to be dissolved on the said grounds of irretrievable breakdown of marriage, per Article 142 of the Constitution of India.
- The Hon’ble Court placed reliance on the case of Sukhendu Das v. Rita Mukherjee, where the Court reasoned that it is not open to the wife to argue that the exercise of jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Indian Constitution for dissolving a marriage may not be appropriate unless both parties consent.
- The Court further stated that the monetary consideration may have been paid covertly, and the law does not require such payment to be shown by positive proof and the court is free to form its reasoning and conclusions on the facts of the case.
- The Hon’ble Court further opined that in adjudicating matrimonial matters in exceptional circumstances, the Supreme Court may issue appropriate orders to do justice to the parties in a given factual scenario by invoking the powers granted by Article 142 of the Indian Constitution, up to and including granting a decree of divorce by mutual consent.
- Additionally, the Hon’ble Court was of the view since the daughter does not want to maintain any relationship with her father, the Court ruled that she will not be entitled to any money from a father with whom she does not wish to maintain any ties for her marriage and education expenses, Hon’ble Court noted that the daughter was around 20 years old and independent to choose her path, but she could not demand money from the appellant for her education and marriage.
- Likewise, the Hon’ble Supreme Court stated that while awarding perpetual alimony to the wife, the court would keep in mind that the finances were available to the mother if she chose to pay for her daughter's expenditures.
- Further, the Hon’ble Court directed the husband to pay Rs. 8000/- per month as maintenance and Rs. 10 Lacs as a final settlement claim, while granting a decree of divorce to the parties.
CONCLUSION
Allowing the appeal the Court ordered the appellant to pay permanent alimony and settlement amount to be deposited within two months from the date on which the order was passed. Further stating that it is not even probable for the parties to sit across the table or even talk on the phone to reach a fair agreement. In the factual information of the current case, there subsists no doubt about the irreversible breakdown of a marriage, thus awarding the parties a decree of divorce on the ground of irretrievable grounds of marriage.
Click here to download the original copy of the judgement
