Supreme Court Dissolves Marriage Under Article 142, Directs Rs 20 Lakh One-Time Alimony

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta heard an appeal by the husband challenging the Punjab and Haryana High Court's dismissal of his petition for dissolution of marriage under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and considered whether this Court should exercise its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to grant a divorce.

The Court allowed the appeal, exercised its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 142 and dissolved the marriage, subject to a one‑time payment of permanent alimony. The bench said the parties had been living separately for about twenty years and that "the continuance of the marital bond, in such circumstances, would serve no meaningful purpose and would only prolong the agony of both parties." The Court, in its reasoning, observed: "We have given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced on behalf of both parties. It is undisputed that the parties have been living separately for about twenty years. The strain in the marital relationship is evident from the facts of the case and the averments made by the appellant-husband. Despite opportunities, including reference to the Supreme Court Mediation Centre, no amicable settlement could be arrived at. At this stage, there appears to be no possibility of reconciliation between the parties. The continuance of the marital bond, in such circumstances, would serve no meaningful purpose and would only prolong the agony of both parties. We are therefore of the considered view that this is a fit case where the marriage has irretrievably broken down, warranting exercise of this Court’s powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India." The Court further recorded that "a sum of ₹20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs only) would be a just and reasonable amount towards permanent alimony, payable as a one-time settlement."

Background The parties were married on 22 June 2003 and had no children. Both were government school teachers. The husband alleged matrimonial strain soon after the marriage, cited an incident following his accident in 2005 where he said the wife did not attend to him, and claimed attempts to obtain signatures under duress; a civil suit on those alleged incidents was later withdrawn after compromise. The wife left the matrimonial home in 2005 and did not return. The husband first filed for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9, which he later withdrew, and then filed HMA No. 92 of 2009 under Section 13 seeking divorce on grounds of cruelty and desertion.

The Trial Court dismissed the divorce petition on 14 August 2012, finding that the husband failed to establish the allegations. The High Court, in FAO No. M-246 of 2012, by its order dated 28 February 2014, affirmed the Trial Court and dismissed the husband's appeal. The husband approached this Court by special leave.

This Court heard counsel and interacted with the parties in person. Noting prolonged separation of nearly two decades, unsuccessful mediation and the absence of any real prospect of reconciliation, the Court concluded the marriage had irretrievably broken down and invoked Article 142 to grant a decree of divorce. The Court fixed permanent alimony at a one‑time payment of ₹20,00,000 to be paid by the husband within two months and ordered that the decree would be drawn upon proof of payment. The respondent was directed to furnish bank details to facilitate payment. The Court also directed that any civil or criminal proceedings between the parties, if pending, would stand closed. The appeal was allowed, and the impugned High Court and Trial Court orders were set aside. Pending applications, if any, were disposed of.

Case Details: Case No.: 2025 INSC 1463 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 35588 of 2025 @ D.17190 of 2024) Case Title: Jatinder Kumar v. Jeewan Lata Appearances: For the Petitioner(s): Not indicated in the judgment For the Respondent(s): Not indicated in the judgment