Wife refuses divorce for 22 yrs, SC ends wedlock
AmitAnand.Choudhary@timesgroup.com
New Delhi: 10.10.2019
Though ‘irretrievable breakdown of marriage’ is not a ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act and Special Marriages Act, the Supreme Court has, in a significant ruling, said divorce can be granted if a marriage is totally unworkable, emotionally dead and beyond salvage.
Coming to the rescue of a man fighting for divorce for the last two decades as his plea was rejected by a lower court and Andhra Pradesh high court after his wife refused consent for separation, a bench of Justices S K Kaul and M R Shah invoked the SC’s inherent powers under Article 142 to do “complete justice” and allowed the petition saying the marriage had broken irretrievably. The couple had been living separately for 22 years after their relationship ran into rough weather just a few years aftermarriage in1993.
SC invoked Art 142 from time to time as Centre failed to amend laws
The apex court in a series of verdicts has asked the Centre to amend the law to introduce irretrievable breakdown as a ground of divorce but the law remains unamended and divorce is denied even if a couple are not living together for years and their relationship bruised beyond repair.
This effectively denies them an opportunity to explore life afresh as their marriage survives in law even if not in substance.
Even the Law Commission in its reports in 1978 and 2009 recommended the Centre to take “immediate action” to amend the laws with regard to “irretrievable breakdown” where a “wedlock became a deadlock”.
As the Centre failed to act on the suggestions, the apex court has from time to time invoked Article 142 to grant divorce even though existing laws do not recognise the ground for divorce.
“This court, in a series of judgments, has exercised its inherent powers under Article 142 of the Constitution for dissolution of a marriage where the court finds that the marriage is totally unworkable, emotionally dead, beyond salvage and has broken down irretrievably, even if the facts of the case do not provide a ground in law on which the divorce could be granted,” the court said.
The bench rejected the wife’s plea that the marriage cannot be dissolved without her consent and granted relief to husband after noting that all efforts to continue the marriage had failed and there was no possibility of a reunion because of the strained relations between the parties.
Full report on www.toi.in
TIMES VIEW
Forcing people to continue in unhappy marriages does nobody any good. Far from strengthening the institutions of marriage and family, the constant misery and strife it entails undermines them like little else can. There is good reason, therefore, for the law to make it as easy and painless as possible for people unhappy in a marriage to end it.
‘AMEND LAWS’
SC, through a series of verdicts, asked govt to make irretrievable breakdown ground for divorce
Law Commission, in its reports in 1978 and 2009, had recommended “immediate action” to amend laws
As Centre failed to act on suggestions, SC has from time to time invoked Article 142 to grant divorce
AmitAnand.Choudhary@timesgroup.com
New Delhi: 10.10.2019
Though ‘irretrievable breakdown of marriage’ is not a ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act and Special Marriages Act, the Supreme Court has, in a significant ruling, said divorce can be granted if a marriage is totally unworkable, emotionally dead and beyond salvage.
Coming to the rescue of a man fighting for divorce for the last two decades as his plea was rejected by a lower court and Andhra Pradesh high court after his wife refused consent for separation, a bench of Justices S K Kaul and M R Shah invoked the SC’s inherent powers under Article 142 to do “complete justice” and allowed the petition saying the marriage had broken irretrievably. The couple had been living separately for 22 years after their relationship ran into rough weather just a few years aftermarriage in1993.
SC invoked Art 142 from time to time as Centre failed to amend laws
The apex court in a series of verdicts has asked the Centre to amend the law to introduce irretrievable breakdown as a ground of divorce but the law remains unamended and divorce is denied even if a couple are not living together for years and their relationship bruised beyond repair.
This effectively denies them an opportunity to explore life afresh as their marriage survives in law even if not in substance.
Even the Law Commission in its reports in 1978 and 2009 recommended the Centre to take “immediate action” to amend the laws with regard to “irretrievable breakdown” where a “wedlock became a deadlock”.
As the Centre failed to act on the suggestions, the apex court has from time to time invoked Article 142 to grant divorce even though existing laws do not recognise the ground for divorce.
“This court, in a series of judgments, has exercised its inherent powers under Article 142 of the Constitution for dissolution of a marriage where the court finds that the marriage is totally unworkable, emotionally dead, beyond salvage and has broken down irretrievably, even if the facts of the case do not provide a ground in law on which the divorce could be granted,” the court said.
The bench rejected the wife’s plea that the marriage cannot be dissolved without her consent and granted relief to husband after noting that all efforts to continue the marriage had failed and there was no possibility of a reunion because of the strained relations between the parties.
Full report on www.toi.in
TIMES VIEW
Forcing people to continue in unhappy marriages does nobody any good. Far from strengthening the institutions of marriage and family, the constant misery and strife it entails undermines them like little else can. There is good reason, therefore, for the law to make it as easy and painless as possible for people unhappy in a marriage to end it.
‘AMEND LAWS’
SC, through a series of verdicts, asked govt to make irretrievable breakdown ground for divorce
Law Commission, in its reports in 1978 and 2009, had recommended “immediate action” to amend laws
As Centre failed to act on suggestions, SC has from time to time invoked Article 142 to grant divorce
Great post.
ReplyDeletehttps://jobs.dataconomy.com/company/RoyceFadel/
Great post.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.ordspill.no/user/profile/basic/?userid=224400