Case Note & Summary
The judgment arises from two miscellaneous civil applications filed by Vijay Suryakant Kakade and Jay Suryakant Kakade (applicants) seeking to set aside a consent decree of divorce passed by the Family Court at Pune. The applicants were married to respondent no.1 (Anushka Vijay Kakade and Anunaya Jay Kakade respectively). The parties had filed a joint petition for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and consent terms were recorded on 28th February 2022. The Family Court passed a decree of divorce on the same day. Subsequently, the applicants filed applications under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) before the Family Court to set aside the consent decree, alleging that the consent was obtained by fraud and collusion. The Family Court dismissed those applications. The applicants then approached the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The High Court framed the issue of whether the consent decree could be set aside on grounds of fraud or collusion. The applicants argued that the respondent no.1 had concealed material facts and that the consent was not free and voluntary. The respondent no.1 contended that the consent was given voluntarily and that the decree was valid. The court analyzed the consent terms and found that they were signed by both parties and their advocates. The court held that the applicants failed to prove any fraud or collusion. The court further held that inherent powers under Section 151 CPC cannot be used to set aside a consent decree when the decree is valid and no fraud is established. The court dismissed both applications, upholding the validity of the consent decree.
Headnote
A) Family Law - Consent Decree - Binding Nature - Consent terms recorded by Family Court under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 are final and binding on parties - The court held that a consent decree cannot be set aside unless fraud or collusion is proved, and mere change of mind is insufficient - Held that the applicants failed to establish any fraud or collusion (Paras 10-15). B) Civil Procedure - Inherent Powers - Section 151 CPC - The court held that inherent powers under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 cannot be invoked to set aside a consent decree when alternative remedies exist or when the decree is valid on its face - Held that the applications under Section 151 were not maintainable (Paras 16-20). C) Family Law - Divorce by Mutual Consent - Section 13B Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - The court observed that once consent terms are filed and decree is passed, the marriage stands dissolved and parties cannot unilaterally withdraw consent - Held that the decree was validly passed and cannot be recalled (Paras 8-12).
Issue of Consideration
Whether consent terms recorded by the Family Court can be set aside on grounds of fraud or collusion, and whether the court can exercise inherent powers under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to recall a consent decree.
Final Decision
Both miscellaneous civil applications are dismissed. The consent decree of divorce passed by the Family Court is upheld. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Consent terms binding
- fraud must be proved
- collusion not established
- inherent powers under Section 151 CPC not available to set aside consent decree
- matrimonial settlement finality
