SC Upholds Divorce Decree, Swaps Lump Sum Alimony For Monthly Maintenance

A bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta heard an appeal by the wife challenging the High Court of Jharkhand's dismissal of her First Appeal against a Family Court decree that granted divorce to the husband; the Court was called upon to consider whether the findings of cruelty and desertion recorded by the Family Court and affirmed by the High Court were liable to interference and what financial relief should follow.

The Court summarized its holding by declining to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below and by modifying the financial relief. The Court, in its reasoning, observed: "Having gone through the record, we think that the findings recorded by the Courts below are findings of fact based on an appreciation of evidence. No perversity has been demonstrated to warrant the interference of this Court." The Court also noted that "the prolonged separation indicates that the matrimonial bond has broken down beyond repair and there is no possibility of resuming cohabitation." In consequence, while the decree of divorce was affirmed, the Court directed payment of maintenance at the rate of Rs.10,000 per month to the appellant, payable from the date of the order.

Background

The parties were married in February 2002 and had two children. The respondent filed O.S. (DP) 486/2018 seeking divorce under sections 13(1)(ia) and 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The Family Court allowed the petition by order dated 23.11.2022, recording that the respondent had established cruelty and desertion and observing that "the conduct of the appellant amounted to cruelty and that the respondent had also succeeded in establishing desertion." The High Court, by its judgment dated 04.10.2023 in F.A. No. 9/2023, affirmed those findings after referring to the appellant's earlier undertaking given in response to a complaint and to the testimony of the parties' son and other material, including the direction of the District Welfare Committee that the children reside with their paternal grandfather.

The Supreme Court reviewed the record, treated the findings below as factual conclusions arising from evidence and found no ground of perversity to warrant interference. The Court recorded the long period of separation and accepted that the matrimonial relationship had broken down beyond repair. While noting that the Family Court had directed a lump sum of Rs.6,00,000 as maintenance, the Court held that, in the interest of complete justice and having regard to the need for continued financial support, it was appropriate to direct monthly maintenance of Rs.10,000 to the appellant, payable from the date of the Supreme Court order. The judgment did not rely on any earlier precedents as part of its ratio and proceeded based on the evidence and factual findings recorded by the courts below. The appeal was disposed of and any pending applications were directed to be disposed of accordingly.

Case Details:
Case No.: SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 20325 OF 2024
NeutralCitation: 2026 INSC 346
Case Title: Mamta Devi v. Sanjay Kumar

Source: 2026 CaseBase(SC) 302