Supreme Court Disposes of Appeal by Dissolving Marriage Under Article 142 on Irretrievable Breakdown and Mutual Consent. Settlement of Maintenance Disputes Under Section 125 Cr.P.C. by Payment of Rs.60,000 and Direction to Terminate Pending Cases Achieved Complete Justice Without Adjudicating Merits of High Court Order.

  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The dispute arose from a marriage solemnized on 18 April 1973 between the appellant wife and the respondent husband. The wife alleged that she was thrown out of the matrimonial home after giving birth to four female children, and the husband neglected and refused to maintain her. She filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and the trial court granted maintenance of Rs.500 per month. The appellate court reduced the amount to Rs.440 per month. The husband challenged the order in revision before the High Court, which remanded the matter on 6 October 1982. During the pendency of the application, the husband obtained an ex-parte divorce decree on 22 October 1980, but that decree was set aside on 9 September 1983, and the divorce petition was finally dismissed on 13 October 1983. The wife's maintenance application was dismissed in default and later restored; the husband's revision against restoration was dismissed, and his application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was also dismissed by the High Court on 16 January 1984. The wife filed a petition under Section 127 Cr.P.C. on 10 December 1984, which was dismissed in default on 11 August 1986, restored on 29 August 1986, and the husband's revision before the Sessions Judge was dismissed on 9 April 1987. The trial court passed an interim order on 24 April 1987 enhancing maintenance by Rs.150 per month. The High Court, on a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., quashed the restoration order, the Sessions Judge's order, and the enhancement order on 4 November 1987. The wife appealed to the Supreme Court. During pendency, the Court attempted reconciliation but noted that the parties had been living separately for over a decade and the relationship was strained and bitter. On 7 December 1995, the wife made a statement that she had no objection to a decree of divorce provided the husband paid Rs.60,000 within twelve weeks, and the husband agreed to pay that amount in full settlement of all maintenance and matrimonial disputes. On 18 March 1996, a memorandum of settlement was filed, agreeing to a decree of divorce on payment of Rs.60,000 and termination of all pending cases. The Supreme Court, in exercise of its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, dissolved the marriage by a decree of divorce, directed that all pending matrimonial and maintenance cases be disposed of and consigned to records upon either party moving the respective courts with a copy of the order, and ordered that the husband continue to maintain the four daughters. The wife was permitted to meet the children at the husband's residence upon written request and prior arrangement. The appeal was disposed of with no order as to costs.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure - Maintenance - Sections 125 and 127, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Settlement of Maintenance Disputes - The wife had initially been granted maintenance, later altered and subjected to multiple proceedings; during Supreme Court pendency, parties agreed that payment of Rs.60,000 would settle all disputes arising under Section 125 Cr.P.C. - Held that the Court can accept such settlement and direct termination of all pending maintenance cases as part of complete justice (Paras 1-3).

B) Constitution of India - Article 142 - Dissolution of Marriage on Irretrievable Breakdown - Exercise of Extraordinary Jurisdiction - The marriage had irretrievably broken down with no possibility of reconciliation, and both parties consented to divorce on condition of payment; the Supreme Court invoked Article 142 to grant a decree of divorce despite the absence of statutory grounds under personal law - Held that Article 142 empowers the Court to do complete justice by dissolving a dead marriage when both parties agree and settle all disputes (Paras 1-3).

C) Criminal Procedure - Application under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Quashing of Restoration and Enhancement Orders - High Court had quashed the restoration of the wife's Section 127 application and the enhancement of maintenance; the Supreme Court did not adjudicate the merits of that order as the parties reached a settlement - Held that pending appeal becomes academic once the parties compromise and the Court exercises plenary power to dispose of all proceedings (Paras 1-3).

D) Family Law - Child Welfare - Maintenance and Visitation Rights - The Court noted that all four daughters were living with the father and being maintained by him; it directed continuation of such maintenance and provided for the mother to meet the children at the father's residence upon written request and prior arrangement - Held that the welfare of children remains a paramount consideration even when dissolving the marriage by mutual consent (Paras 1-3).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Supreme Court could dissolve the marriage under Article 142 of the Constitution on the ground of irretrievable breakdown and mutual consent despite the absence of statutory grounds for divorce; whether the settlement of maintenance disputes under Section 125 Cr.P.C. could be accepted and all pending matrimonial and maintenance cases terminated; whether the High Court's order quashing restoration of maintenance application and enhancement could be set aside in the light of the settlement.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

In exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court dissolved the marriage between the parties by a decree of divorce. All pending cases arising out of matrimonial and maintenance proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. were to stand disposed of and consigned to records upon either party moving the respective courts with a copy of the order. The respondent was to pay Rs.60,000 to the appellant in terms of the settlement. The Court noted that all four daughters were living with the husband and he continued to maintain them; the wife could meet the children at the husband's residence upon written request and prior arrangement. The appeal was disposed of with no order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Article 142 of the Constitution of India
  • irretrievable breakdown of marriage
  • mutual consent divorce
  • settlement of maintenance disputes under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
  • termination of pending matrimonial and maintenance cases
  • child welfare and visitation rights
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

1996 LawText (SC) (04) 33

1996-04-03

A.S. Anand, Faizan Uddin

JT 1996 (5) 655, 1996 SCALE (3) 293

Smt. Kanchan Devi

Pramod Kumar Mittal & Anr.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Matrimonial dispute involving maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and divorce, ultimately disposed of by the Supreme Court under Article 142 through a mutual settlement.

Remedy Sought

The appellant wife challenged the High Court order dated 4 November 1987 quashing restoration of her Section 127 Cr.P.C. application and enhancement of maintenance; during pendency, both parties sought dissolution of marriage and settlement of all disputes.

Filing Reason

The wife alleged she was thrown out of the matrimonial home after the birth of four daughters, and the husband neglected and refused to maintain her, leading to maintenance proceedings; subsequent disputes arose over restoration, enhancement, and the husband's divorce petition.

Previous Decisions

Trial court initially granted Rs.500 per month maintenance; appellate court reduced to Rs.440; High Court remanded matter on 6 October 1982; ex-parte divorce decree obtained by husband on 22 October 1980 was set aside on 9 September 1983 and divorce petition dismissed on 13 October 1983; wife's Section 127 application dismissed in default on 11 August 1986, restored on 29 August 1986, husband's revision dismissed on 9 April 1987, trial court enhanced maintenance by Rs.150 on 24 April 1987; High Court on 4 November 1987 quashed restoration and enhancement orders.

Issues

Whether the Supreme Court could dissolve the marriage under Article 142 of the Constitution on the ground of irretrievable breakdown and mutual consent despite the absence of statutory grounds for divorce. Whether the settlement between the parties regarding maintenance disputes under Section 125 Cr.P.C. could be accepted and all pending matrimonial and maintenance cases terminated. Whether the High Court's order quashing the restoration of the Section 127 Cr.P.C. application and the enhancement of maintenance was valid, though rendered academic by the settlement.

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant wife contended that she was entitled to maintenance and had been denied by the husband; she agreed to divorce only on condition that the husband pay Rs.60,000 within twelve weeks, failing which she would not be bound by her statement. The respondent husband contended that the marriage had irretrievably broken down and there was no possibility of the parties living together as husband and wife; he agreed to pay Rs.60,000 in full settlement of all maintenance and matrimonial disputes. Both parties submitted a memorandum of settlement dated 18 March 1996 agreeing to a decree of divorce on payment of Rs.60,000 and termination of all pending matrimonial and maintenance proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution, can grant a decree of divorce on mutual consent and irretrievable breakdown of marriage when both parties agree to a settlement and the marriage is dead, even if no statutory ground is strictly made out, to do complete justice between the parties. Settlement of maintenance proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is permissible and can be accepted by the Court to terminate all pending disputes.

Judgment Excerpts

I have no objection to a decree of divorce being made because my marriage with the respondent has irretrievably broken down provided, however, the respondent pays a sum of Rs.60000/- (rupees sixty thousand) within twelve weeks from today. The respondent husband also made a statement... I agree with her statement and shall pay a sum of Rs.60000/- (rupees sixty thousand) within twelve weeks from today to her. That amount shall be in settlement of all the disputes arising out of the maintenance proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. as well as for grant of divorce on mutual consent. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and being satisfied that the marriage between the appellant and the respondent has irretrievably broken down and that there is no possibility of reconciliation, we in exercise of our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India hereby direct that the marriage between the appellant and the respondent shall stand dissolved by a decree of divorce.

Procedural History

Marriage solemnized on 18 April 1973. Wife filed Section 125 Cr.P.C. application; trial court allowed Rs.500 per month; appellate court reduced to Rs.440 per month. High Court remanded matter on 6 October 1982. Husband obtained ex-parte divorce decree on 22 October 1980, which was set aside on 9 September 1983; divorce petition dismissed on 13 October 1983. Wife's maintenance application dismissed in default and restored; husband's revision against restoration dismissed; husband's Section 482 Cr.P.C. application dismissed on 16 January 1984. Wife filed Section 127 Cr.P.C. on 10 December 1984; dismissed in default on 11 August 1986, restored on 29 August 1986; husband's revision dismissed on 9 April 1987; trial court enhanced maintenance on 24 April 1987. Wife filed Section 482 Cr.P.C. in High Court; on 4 November 1987 High Court quashed restoration, Sessions Judge order, and enhancement. Wife appealed to Supreme Court. During pendency, parties made statements on 7 December 1995 and filed memorandum of settlement on 18 March 1996; Supreme Court dissolved marriage under Article 142 and disposed of all pending cases.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 125, Section 127, Section 482
  • Constitution of India, 1950: Article 142
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Bank's Appeal Against NCDRC Order Holding Bank Liable for Insurance Claim. Borrower's Acceptance of SCDRC Order and One-Time Settlement with Bank Precludes Liability.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses State Appeal in Land Acquisition Compensation Case — Enhanced Compensation Upheld as Per Earlier Judgment. Market value of acquired land fixed at Rs.82,500 per hectare with modifications to additional component and inter...