The Hindu : New Delhi News : “Continuance of failed marriage for name sake is cruelty”

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Sunday, Jul 20, 2008
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version

New Delhi

New Delhi

“Continuance of failed marriage for name sake is cruelty”

J. Venkatesan

New Delhi: When a marriage is dead emotionally and practically and when there is no chance of retrieval, its continuance for namesake will amount to cruelty, the Supreme Court has held.

A Bench consisting of Justices Altamas Kabir and Aftab Alam ordered dissolution of the marriage of a couple who had been living separately for 14 years, most of which was spent in acrimonious allegations against each other in litigation.

Satish Sitole and Ganga were married on May 22, 1992 according to Hindu rites and customs. On August 21, 1994 the woman, for whatever reason, left her matrimonial home and went back to her parents and since then the couple had been living separately.

Set aside

On an application from the husband, a trial court in Indore, while rejecting divorce, granted judicial separation. The Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed his appeal, allowed the cross-appeal filed by Ganga and set aside the trial court judgment and decree.

Appeal

In his appeal before the apex court against this judgment, Satish said even if he had been unable to prove his case of cruelty and desertion as the grounds for seeking dissolution of the marriage, technicalities should not stand in the way of the court granting him relief in exercise of its power under Article 142 of the Constitution (powers of the Supreme Court to pass any order to ensure complete justice), considering the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage.

The Bench said: “We explored the possibility of an amicable solution, but such an attempt ended in failure on account of the rigid stance taken on behalf of the respondent. A male child (Chetan) had been born in wedlock on February 28, 1993 and we had hoped that the child would act as a catalyst to an amicable settlement, but even the existence of the child could not bring about reconciliation between the parties.”

Permanent alimony

The Bench noted that despite attempts at reconciliation, the Gordian Knot could not be cut and clearly the marriage had broken down irretrievably. It would perhaps be in the best interest of the parties to have the marriage dissolved with adequate provision by way of permanent alimony for the respondent.

“Accordingly, in exercise of powers under Article 142, we direct that the marriage shall stand dissolved, subject to the appellant paying the respondent Rs. 2 lakh by way of permanent alimony and Rs. 25 as costs of this appeal to her.”

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

New Delhi