Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(ia) — Divorce on Ground of Cruelty — Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage — Supreme Court upheld the decree of divorce granted by the High Court, noting that the parties had been residing separately for over thirteen years (since 2012) and the relationship was deeply embittered and acrimonious. Held, continuing the legal bond served no purpose for the spouses or the child, and dissolution was in the interest of justice and welfare of all concerned.
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 25 — Permanent Alimony and Maintenance — Judicial Officer's heightened obligation to ensure fair and dignified financial security for the wife and daughter. Supreme Court enhanced the lump-sum permanent alimony awarded to the appellant-wife from Rs. 30,00,000/- to Rs. 50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs only), considering the respondent-husband's income, status, and future prospects, and to ensure the wife's reasonable financial independence commensurate with the marital standard of living.
Settlement of Claims — The enhanced amount of Rs. 50,00,000/- was treated as full and final settlement of all monetary and other claims arising from the marital relationship, and all pending civil or criminal proceedings between the parties stood closed.
Child Maintenance and Welfare — Directions of the High Court regarding the daughter's financial security were upheld: deposit of LIC maturity amount (approx. Rs. 41,00,000/-), monthly deposit of Rs. 30,000/- until the daughter is self-maintaining, bearing all marriage expenses, and prohibition against disinheritance.
Analysis of Facts in Court View
A. Background and Marital Status
Marriage and Status: Marriage solemnised on 6th December 2008. The respondent-husband is a Judicial Officer (currently a Family Court Judge at Jamnagar, Haryana), and the appellant-wife was formerly an Additional Advocate General (now no longer practicing).
Child: A daughter was born on 13th November 2009 (17 years old at the time of the Supreme Court's judgment).
Separation: Parties have been residing separately since 2012, constituting more than thirteen years.
B. Litigation History
Original Petition: The respondent-husband instituted a divorce petition on the ground of cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the HMA.
Family Court's Finding: The Family Court dismissed the petition on 11th April 2023, holding that cruelty by the wife was not proved and, in fact, the husband had subjected the wife to acts of cruelty.
High Court's Finding (Impugned Judgment): The High Court allowed the husband's appeal, granted a decree of divorce, and awarded the wife Rs. 30,00,000/- as permanent alimony based on the husband's offer. It observed that compelling the parties to reside together was not in the interest of the spouses or the daughter, and reconciliation efforts had failed.
C. Supreme Court's Observations on the Factual Matrix
Irretrievable Breakdown: The Court noted the long period of separation (13+ years) and the failure of substantial efforts to restore the marriage. The relationship was found to be "deeply embittered and acrimonious."
Welfare of Child: The Court emphasized that the wellbeing, care, and future stability of the seventeen-year-old daughter must remain paramount.
Conclusion on Relationship: It was evident that the marital bond had "long ceased to have any substance," and continuing the tie would only prolong hostility and impede their ability to move forward with dignity.
Application of Law
I. Dissolution of Marriage (Divorce)
The Supreme Court affirmed the High Court's decision to grant a decree of divorce, not by re-examining the specific allegations of cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia), but by invoking the principle of irretrievable breakdown of marriage.
Legal Rationale: Given the prolonged separation (13 years) and the acrimonious relationship where all reconciliation attempts had failed, the Court concluded that no purpose would be served in perpetuating a legal bond. The dissolution was deemed necessary in the interest of justice and for the welfare of all concerned, including the daughter.
II. Permanent Alimony and Maintenance (Section 25, HMA)
Status and Obligation: The Court specifically highlighted the respondent-husband's status as a serving judicial officer holding a responsible public position, which places a heightened obligation on him to ensure fair, adequate, and dignified financial security for his wife and daughter.
Entitlement of Wife: The appellant-wife, who had given up her legal practice, was deemed entitled to a standard of living broadly commensurate with what she enjoyed during the marriage.
Enhancement: Having regard to the husband's income, status, and future prospects, and the need for the wife's reasonable financial independence, the Court enhanced the permanent alimony from Rs. 30,00,000/- to Rs. 50,00,000/-.
Full and Final Settlement: This enhanced amount was mandated to be a full and final settlement of all monetary and other claims arising from the marriage, leading to the closure of all related pending civil or criminal proceedings.
III. Daughter's Maintenance and Welfare
The Court upheld all directions of the High Court pertaining to the daughter's financial future, including:
A monthly support of Rs. 30,000/-.
Transfer of a substantial LIC maturity amount to her account.
The husband's responsibility to bear all her marriage expenses.
A prohibition against disinheriting her from the husband's estate, emphasizing the father's continued legal and moral obligation to ensure his seventeen-year-old child's financial stability, especially as she approaches higher education.
DISPOSITION: The Civil Appeal was disposed of. The decree of divorce was upheld, and the direction relating to permanent alimony was modified and enhanced.
