Second Petition For Divorce Founded On New Facts Not Barred By Res-Judicata: Madras High Court

WHAT DID THE Court SAY?

• In S v. V, the Madras High Court noted that grounds for dissolution of a marriage are of continuing nature which means that a subsequent divorce petition cannot be said to be hit by res judicata.
• A single judge bench of Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan held that the cause of action in the subsequent petition was different from the first one. 
• The grounds of desertion, adultery or cruelty are likely to vary with respect to facts leading to different causes of action.

WHAT IS THE CASE ABOUT? 

• In this case, the petitioner wife filed a criminal revision petition against the divorce petition of her husband on the grounds of res-judicata was dismissed.
• In 2005, the husband had first moved for divorce on the grounds of cruelty while the wife had filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights.
• In 2018, the husband moved a second divorce petition on the grounds of continuous cruelty and desertion.

CONTENTIONS OF THE PARTIES: 

• The petitioner contended that since her husband had already filed a petition with the same subject-matter, the second divorce petition will be hit by res judicata.
• The counsel of the respondent husband argued that the facts related to the grounds are distinct from the first petition and therefore, the doctrine of res judicata will not apply here.

OBSERVATION OF THE COURT AND DECISION:

• The Ld. Court noted that the present petition deals with a distinct cause of action from the petition filed in 2005.
• The Court further observed that in order to be hit by res judicata, the cause of action leading to the filing of the petition must be similar to a previous petition.
• Accordingly, it was held that the divorce petition is maintainable and is not barred under the principle of res judicata.

What do you think about the decision of the Court? Let us know in the comments section below!