Full Judgment Text
REPORTABLE
2025 INSC 1102
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
C.A. NOS…............................../2025
(@SLP(C) NOS.15168-15173/2024)
GEETA @ REETA MISHRA ...APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
AJAY KUMAR MISHRA …RESPONDENT(S)
J U D G M E N T
VIKRAM NATH, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The present appeals arise from the judgment and order
dated 18th December 2023 passed by the High Court of
Delhi in MAT.APP.(F.C.) No.20 of 2020, whereby the High
Court affirmed the decree of divorce granted by the Family
Court vide order dated 20th September 2019.
3. The relevant facts, in brief, are as follows:
3.1. The parties were married on 6th May 1996 and
have two children from the marriage: a daughter born
in 1997 and a son born in 1999.
3.2. In March 2009, the respondent-husband filed a
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
SONIA BHASIN
Date: 2025.09.12
14:59:57 IST
Reason:
divorce petition being HMA No.135/2009 under
C.A. NOS…/2025@SLP(C) NOS.15168-15173/2024 Page 1 of 5
1
Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 , on
the ground of cruelty. The husband alleged various
instances of mental cruelty by the wife, whereas the
wife contended that she herself had been subjected to
mental and physical cruelty.
3.3. The appellant-wife thereafter filed a complaint
under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from
2
Domestic Violence Act, 2005 against the respondent-
husband and his family members.
3.4. In the DV Act proceedings, the Mahila Court
directed the husband to pay maintenance of
Rs.6,300/- per month, later enhanced to Rs.7,500/-
per month.
3.5. In 2013, the respondent-husband moved an
application in the DV Act proceedings seeking DNA
testing of both children, claiming they were not his.
Eventually, the main complaint under the DV Act was
dismissed. On appeal, the appellate Court, by order
dated 31st July 2019, held the respondent-husband
guilty of domestic violence and directed him to pay
Rs.2,00,000/- to the appellant-wife. This was
enhanced to Rs.7,00,000/- by the High Court on 9th
November 2022 in a revision filed by the appellant-
wife. The Special Leave Petition filed by the
1
HMA.
2
DV Act.
C.A. NOS…/2025@SLP(C) NOS.15168-15173/2024 Page 2 of 5
respondent-husband challenging the said order was
dismissed by this Court on 27th March 2023.
3.6. Meanwhile, the Family Court, vide order dated
20th September 2019 in HMA No.299 of 2019, granted
divorce on the ground of cruelty. The appellant-wife
challenged this before the High Court of Delhi in
MAT.APP.(F.C.) No.20 of 2020.
3.7. The High Court, by the impugned judgment,
affirmed the decree of divorce. It observed that the
parties had been in constant acrimony since the
inception of their marriage, leading the wife to make
repeated complaints to the police. The High Court held
that lodging false complaints amounted to cruelty. It
also noted that the parties have lived separately since
around 2009, with no attempt at reconciliation.
3.8. Aggrieved, the appellant-wife has preferred these
appeals.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and the
respondent appearing in person.
5. Before this Court, the appellant-wife has confined her
claim to seeking an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees
Ten Lakhs only) towards the marriage expenses of their
daughter.
6. The appellant-wife submits that the respondent-husband
earns from running an aquarium shop, rental income
from his properties, and contributions from his father.
C.A. NOS…/2025@SLP(C) NOS.15168-15173/2024 Page 3 of 5
The respondent denies these claims and states that he
has no earnings whatsoever.
7. It is evident that the marital relationship between the
parties has ceased to exist in substance. Even an attempt
at mediation before us proved unsuccessful. Since the
appeals are pressed only to the limited extent of payment
of a certain amount, and in view of the long separation
and irretrievable breakdown of the marriage, we find no
reason to interfere with the decree of divorce granted by
the Family Court and affirmed by the High Court.
8. As regards the issue of contribution for the daughter’s
marriage, the parties have taken conflicting stands on the
respondent’s income. Nevertheless, on our consideration
of the record and submissions, we are satisfied that the
respondent is capable of making provision for his
daughter’s marriage.
9. It is clear that the litigation between the parties has been
prolonged and acrimonious. Yet, the appellant-wife has
been reasonable in limiting her claim before us. She has
raised and supported both children largely on her own. It
is a father’s duty to provide for his children, and meeting
the marriage expenses of his daughter is a modest
obligation. We are of the considered view that the
respondent can and should contribute Rs.10,00,000/-
(Rupees Ten Lakhs only) for this purpose as meeting the
reasonable expenses of his daughter’s marriage is a
natural extension of his duty as a parent, irrespective of
differences with the spouse.
C.A. NOS…/2025@SLP(C) NOS.15168-15173/2024 Page 4 of 5
10. Accordingly, the respondent-husband is directed to pay
an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) to
the appellant-wife towards the marriage expenses of their
daughter on or before 15th October 2025. In case of
default, the Registry shall revive these appeals for further
consideration and appropriate orders.
11. The appellant-wife shall provide her bank account details
to the respondent-husband to facilitate payment.
12. The decree of divorce granted by the Trial Court and
affirmed by the High Court stands affirmed subject to the
direction contained in paragraph 10 above.
13. In view of the above directions, the appeals stand
disposed of.
14. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
…………………………………..J.
[VIKRAM NATH]
…………………………………..J.
[SANDEEP MEHTA]
NEW DELHI;
SEPTEMBER 12, 2025
C.A. NOS…/2025@SLP(C) NOS.15168-15173/2024 Page 5 of 5
2025 INSC 1102
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
C.A. NOS…............................../2025
(@SLP(C) NOS.15168-15173/2024)
GEETA @ REETA MISHRA ...APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
AJAY KUMAR MISHRA …RESPONDENT(S)
J U D G M E N T
VIKRAM NATH, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The present appeals arise from the judgment and order
dated 18th December 2023 passed by the High Court of
Delhi in MAT.APP.(F.C.) No.20 of 2020, whereby the High
Court affirmed the decree of divorce granted by the Family
Court vide order dated 20th September 2019.
3. The relevant facts, in brief, are as follows:
3.1. The parties were married on 6th May 1996 and
have two children from the marriage: a daughter born
in 1997 and a son born in 1999.
3.2. In March 2009, the respondent-husband filed a
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
SONIA BHASIN
Date: 2025.09.12
14:59:57 IST
Reason:
divorce petition being HMA No.135/2009 under
C.A. NOS…/2025@SLP(C) NOS.15168-15173/2024 Page 1 of 5
1
Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 , on
the ground of cruelty. The husband alleged various
instances of mental cruelty by the wife, whereas the
wife contended that she herself had been subjected to
mental and physical cruelty.
3.3. The appellant-wife thereafter filed a complaint
under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from
2
Domestic Violence Act, 2005 against the respondent-
husband and his family members.
3.4. In the DV Act proceedings, the Mahila Court
directed the husband to pay maintenance of
Rs.6,300/- per month, later enhanced to Rs.7,500/-
per month.
3.5. In 2013, the respondent-husband moved an
application in the DV Act proceedings seeking DNA
testing of both children, claiming they were not his.
Eventually, the main complaint under the DV Act was
dismissed. On appeal, the appellate Court, by order
dated 31st July 2019, held the respondent-husband
guilty of domestic violence and directed him to pay
Rs.2,00,000/- to the appellant-wife. This was
enhanced to Rs.7,00,000/- by the High Court on 9th
November 2022 in a revision filed by the appellant-
wife. The Special Leave Petition filed by the
1
HMA.
2
DV Act.
C.A. NOS…/2025@SLP(C) NOS.15168-15173/2024 Page 2 of 5
respondent-husband challenging the said order was
dismissed by this Court on 27th March 2023.
3.6. Meanwhile, the Family Court, vide order dated
20th September 2019 in HMA No.299 of 2019, granted
divorce on the ground of cruelty. The appellant-wife
challenged this before the High Court of Delhi in
MAT.APP.(F.C.) No.20 of 2020.
3.7. The High Court, by the impugned judgment,
affirmed the decree of divorce. It observed that the
parties had been in constant acrimony since the
inception of their marriage, leading the wife to make
repeated complaints to the police. The High Court held
that lodging false complaints amounted to cruelty. It
also noted that the parties have lived separately since
around 2009, with no attempt at reconciliation.
3.8. Aggrieved, the appellant-wife has preferred these
appeals.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and the
respondent appearing in person.
5. Before this Court, the appellant-wife has confined her
claim to seeking an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees
Ten Lakhs only) towards the marriage expenses of their
daughter.
6. The appellant-wife submits that the respondent-husband
earns from running an aquarium shop, rental income
from his properties, and contributions from his father.
C.A. NOS…/2025@SLP(C) NOS.15168-15173/2024 Page 3 of 5
The respondent denies these claims and states that he
has no earnings whatsoever.
7. It is evident that the marital relationship between the
parties has ceased to exist in substance. Even an attempt
at mediation before us proved unsuccessful. Since the
appeals are pressed only to the limited extent of payment
of a certain amount, and in view of the long separation
and irretrievable breakdown of the marriage, we find no
reason to interfere with the decree of divorce granted by
the Family Court and affirmed by the High Court.
8. As regards the issue of contribution for the daughter’s
marriage, the parties have taken conflicting stands on the
respondent’s income. Nevertheless, on our consideration
of the record and submissions, we are satisfied that the
respondent is capable of making provision for his
daughter’s marriage.
9. It is clear that the litigation between the parties has been
prolonged and acrimonious. Yet, the appellant-wife has
been reasonable in limiting her claim before us. She has
raised and supported both children largely on her own. It
is a father’s duty to provide for his children, and meeting
the marriage expenses of his daughter is a modest
obligation. We are of the considered view that the
respondent can and should contribute Rs.10,00,000/-
(Rupees Ten Lakhs only) for this purpose as meeting the
reasonable expenses of his daughter’s marriage is a
natural extension of his duty as a parent, irrespective of
differences with the spouse.
C.A. NOS…/2025@SLP(C) NOS.15168-15173/2024 Page 4 of 5
10. Accordingly, the respondent-husband is directed to pay
an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) to
the appellant-wife towards the marriage expenses of their
daughter on or before 15th October 2025. In case of
default, the Registry shall revive these appeals for further
consideration and appropriate orders.
11. The appellant-wife shall provide her bank account details
to the respondent-husband to facilitate payment.
12. The decree of divorce granted by the Trial Court and
affirmed by the High Court stands affirmed subject to the
direction contained in paragraph 10 above.
13. In view of the above directions, the appeals stand
disposed of.
14. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
…………………………………..J.
[VIKRAM NATH]
…………………………………..J.
[SANDEEP MEHTA]
NEW DELHI;
SEPTEMBER 12, 2025
C.A. NOS…/2025@SLP(C) NOS.15168-15173/2024 Page 5 of 5