Supreme Court Grants Divorce via Article 142 Citing Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage Despite Spousal Opposition

The appellant-husband and respondent-wife have lived separately since 2003.

The husband alleged constant harassment and scandalous allegations by the wife, which led to the loss of his job abroad and forced relocation to India.

Despite providing over Rs. 40,00,000 for the upkeep of the wife and daughter over the years, the parties remained estranged.

The appellant moved the Supreme Court after the High Court of Andhra Pradesh upheld the Family Court’s dismissal of his divorce petition.

During the proceedings, the husband offered an additional one-time settlement of Rs. 60,00,000, while the wife opposed the divorce citing societal pressure, despite an inability to explain how the relationship could be restored.

1. Whether the marriage between the parties had irretrievably broken down, necessitating the exercise of extraordinary powers to grant a decree of divorce.

2. Whether a decree of divorce can be granted despite the opposition of one spouse in the interest of justice.

Article 142 of the Constitution of India, which allows the Supreme Court to pass any order necessary for doing "complete justice" in any cause or matter.

The judicial doctrine of irretrievable breakdown of marriage, where a marriage is considered "dead for all practical purposes" and continuing the legal bond would be futile.

The Court observed that the parties had been separated for over two decades (since 2003), establishing a total lack of emotional or marital bond.

The Court noted that the respondent-wife’s opposition to the divorce was based on societal pressure rather than a genuine possibility of reconciliation, which she could not satisfactorily explain when queried.

The Court reasoned that forcing a relationship to continue through judicial proceedings is impossible when stances are "absolutely hard and totally inflexible".

The Court took an objective and "realistic view," determining that the marriage was functionally dead and that granting a divorce was necessary to allow both parties to move forward with their lives.

To balance the equities, the Court tied the dissolution to a significant financial settlement to ensure the wife's future maintenance.

The appellant must pay the respondent Rs. 60,00,000 within two months; the Registry must release the deposited Rs. 68,00,000 plus accrued interest (approx. Rs. 75,00,000) to the respondent within two weeks; the daughter’s rights to the appellant’s estate and ancestral property remain intact, and the appellant must contribute to her marriage expenses; and pending litigation in Hyderabad (FCA No. 93/2019) stands quashed.