Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Judgments

Recent judgments citing this act

1. AndMamindlapally Naresh vs Mamindlapally Nava Jyothi on 24 February, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana24 Feb 2023

   Case Name: Court: Date of Judgment: Bench: Subject: Key Legal Propositions 1. An appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act can be withdrawn with liberty to file an application for divorce by mutual consent. 2. Courts may permit withdrawal of appeals when reasonable cause is demonstrated through affidavit. 3. Upon withdrawal of an appeal, pending miscellaneous petitions are deemed closed. Judgment Summary Background: The appeal (C.M.A. No. 530 of 2020) stemmed from an order and decree dated 23rd of 2020 in HMOP No. 134 of 2016 before the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kothagudem. The appellant sought to withdraw the appeal to pursue a divorce by mutual consent. I.A. No. 1 of 2022 was filed seeking permission to withdraw the appeal. Held: A. On Withdrawal of Appeal: Majority View: The Court allowed the application for withdrawal of the appeal, dismissing it as withdrawn with liberty to file for divorce by mutual consent. The reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of the application were considered sufficient. Dissenting View: None. B. On Pending Miscellaneous Petitions: Majority View: All pending miscellaneous petitions were directed to stand closed in light of

2. Smt.S.Vimala vs S.Ranga Rao on 31 March, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana31 Mar 2023

   Case Name: Smt.S.Vimala vs S.Ranga Rao on 31 March, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 31 March, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice T.Vinod Kumar and Smt Justice P.Sree Sudha Subject: Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Desertion, Hindu Marriage Act Key Legal Propositions 1. Desertion as a ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act requires a complete abandonment of one spouse by the other without reasonable cause and without the consent of the deserted spouse. 2. The quantum of permanent alimony is determined by considering the status of the parties, the duration of marriage, the earning capacity of the spouse, and the needs of the dependent spouse. 3. Evidence presented after a prolonged legal battle, even if belated, can be considered by the court, particularly when it reveals a significant change in circumstances or hidden assets of the opposing party. Judgment Summary Background: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal arises from a divorce decree granted by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, dissolving the marriage between Smt. S.Vimala (Appellant/Wife) and S.Ranga Rao (Respondent/Husband). The wife appealed, primarily

3. Vaddepally Rajkumar vs. Madhuravani [Rekha] on 31 March, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana31 Mar 2023

   Case Name: Vaddepally Rajkumar vs. Madhuravani [Rekha] on 31 March, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 31 March, 2023 Bench: Justice T. Vinod Kumar and Justice P. Sree Sudha Subject: Hindu Marriage, Divorce, Cruelty, Desertion, Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage Key Legal Propositions 1. Cruelty for the purposes of divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act can encompass both physical and mental torture. 2. Desertion requires intentional and permanent abandonment of one spouse by the other without consent and without reasonable cause. 3. When a marriage has irretrievably broken down, and there is no possibility of reconciliation, the court may grant a divorce, particularly considering the welfare of any children involved. Judgment Summary Background: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal arises from the dismissal of a divorce petition (O.P. No. 98 of 2013) by the Senior Civil Judge, Siddipet. The appellant/husband, Vaddepally Rajkumar, sought divorce from the respondent/wife, Madhuravani (Rekha), alleging cruelty and desertion. The trial court found the allegations unproven. Held: A. On Cruelty & Desertion: Majority View: The Court found that the husb

4. F.C.A.No.120 OF 2016 AND F.C.A.No.129 OF 2016 on 20 February, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana20 Feb 2023

   Case Name: F.C.A.No.120 OF 2016 AND F.C.A.No.129 OF 2016 on 20 February, 2023 Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh Date of Judgment: 20 February, 2023 Bench: Dr. Justice Chillakur Sumalatha & Smt. Justice M.G.Priyadarsini Subject: Divorce, Restitution of Conjugal Rights, Maintenance Key Legal Propositions 1. The party seeking relief must establish entitlement to it. 2. Mental cruelty, if alleged, must be substantiated with evidence. 3. The conduct of both spouses is relevant when assessing grounds for divorce or restitution of conjugal rights. Judgment Summary Background: These appeals arise from a Family Court decision dismissing a husband’s petition for divorce and granting a wife’s petition for restitution of conjugal rights, while partially allowing her maintenance claim for their son. The husband alleges cruelty by the wife, while the wife alleges infidelity and desertion by the husband. Both appeals challenge the Family Court’s order. Held: A. On Cruelty & Desertion (Grounds for Divorce): Majority View: The Court upheld the Family Court’s finding that the husband failed to establish grounds for divorce based on cruelty or desertion. The evidence did not demonstrate gra

5. Kallakuri Srinivasa Rao vs C.M.R. Velu on 27 January, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana27 Jan 2023

   Case Name: Court: Date of Judgment: Bench: Subject: Key Legal Propositions 1. Prolonged separation, coupled with a lack of effort towards reconciliation, can constitute cruelty justifying dissolution of marriage under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act. 2. A party abandoning the marital relationship on trivial issues, even after attempts at reconciliation, may be considered as demonstrating conduct amounting to cruelty. 3. The court may uphold a decree of divorce based on cruelty when the evidence demonstrates a breakdown of the marital relationship due to the conduct of one spouse, even if specific grave allegations are absent. Judgment Summary Background: This Family Court Appeal challenges a decree of divorce granted by the Additional Family Court, Hyderabad, under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, based on the ground of cruelty. The appellant (wife) contends she was not guilty of cruelty, while the respondent (husband) maintains her conduct constituted cruelty leading to the breakdown of the marriage. Held: A. On Cruelty & Breakdown of Marriage: Majority View: The Court affirmed the Family Court’s finding that the appellant’s conduct amounted to cruelty

6. S. Naveen vs. Naveena Yedlapalli on 17 March, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana17 Mar 2023

   Case Name: S. Naveen vs. Naveena Yedlapalli on 17 March, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 17 March, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice Sambasivarao Naidu Subject: Family Law – Interim Maintenance – Hindu Marriage Act – Setting aside of order and remand – Opportunity of hearing. Key Legal Propositions 1. A trial court’s failure to consider a validly filed counter and provide an opportunity of hearing to a party constitutes a procedural irregularity warranting intervention by the High Court. 2. Remand is an appropriate remedy when a trial court fails to consider crucial evidence or arguments, leading to a potentially unjust outcome. 3. Courts should consider extenuating circumstances, such as pandemic-related restrictions, when assessing a party’s ability to participate in proceedings. Judgment Summary Background: This Civil Revision Petition arises from an order dated 17 February 2022, passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Hyderabad, in I.A. No. 932 of 2021, in O.P. No. 365 of 2021. The Family Court directed the petitioner-husband to pay interim maintenance of Rs. 20,000/- per month and legal expenses of Rs. 10,000/- to the responden

7. F.C.A. No.80 OF 2022 on 25 January, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana25 Jan 2023

   Case Name: F.C.A. No.80 OF 2022 Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh Date of Judgment: 25 January, 2023 Bench: Dr. Justice Chillakur Sumalatha and Smt. Justice M.G. Priyadarsini Subject: Family Law – Divorce – Cruelty – Hindu Marriage Act Key Legal Propositions 1. The act of a woman seeking employment for the livelihood of the family cannot be termed as cruelty within the meaning of Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act. 2. Establishing cruelty as grounds for divorce requires demonstrating acts impacting either spouse or family members, and trivial issues do not suffice. 3. Courts should appreciate efforts made by a spouse to contribute to the family's livelihood, particularly when the other spouse is differently abled. Judgment Summary Background: The appellant filed an appeal challenging the Principal Family Court’s dismissal of his petition for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, alleging cruelty by the respondent. The appellant claimed the respondent neglected the family and caused distress by contacting the police during disputes. The respondent countered that she performed household duties and worked as a teacher to support the family, whi

8. Tatikonda Madhavi vs B. Shiva Kumar on 29 August, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana29 Aug 2023

   Case Name: Tatikonda Madhavi vs B. Shiva Kumar on 29 August, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 29 August, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili and Sri Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti Subject: Divorce, Compromise, Hindu Marriage Act Key Legal Propositions 1. A compromise between parties can lead to the closure of an appeal, even if it involves affirming a lower court's decree. 2. High Courts have the discretion to close appeals when parties reach a mutual settlement and request the same. 3. Parties can agree on terms of separation, including financial considerations, as part of a compromise agreement. Judgment Summary Background: This appeal (C.M.A.No:354 of 2018) stemmed from a divorce decree granted by the Senior Civil Judge, Siddipet, in O.P.No.19 of 2015. The appellant-wife filed the appeal challenging the divorce. However, both parties subsequently informed the High Court that they had reached a compromise. A joint memo outlining the terms of the compromise was filed. Held: A. On Appeal & Compromise: Majority View: The Court accepted the compromise reached between the parties and closed the appeal. The Court noted the filing of a

9. V. Snitha vs K. Vijaya Rama Rao on 04 July, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana4 Jul 2023

   Case Name: V. Snitha vs K. Vijaya Rama Rao on 04 July, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 04 July, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice Sambasiva Rao Naidu Subject: Family Law – Interim Maintenance – Revision Petition against Family Court Order – Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act Key Legal Propositions 1. For interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, the petitioner must establish a prima facie case of lack of independent income and the respondent’s capacity to pay. 2. The Court may consider the petitioner’s and her family’s financial resources when determining the grant of interim maintenance. 3. Family Courts should expedite the disposal of pending divorce petitions, especially when a significant period has elapsed since their filing, to avoid prejudice to the parties. Judgment Summary Background: This Civil Revision Petition challenges the order of the Family Court, L.B. Nagar, Ranga Reddy District, dismissing the petitioner’s application for interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The petitioner sought maintenance from her husband, alleging cruelty and harassment. The respondent countered,

10. Dr. Chillakur Sumalatha & Smt. Justice M.G. Priyadarshini vs Respondent on 01 March, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana1 Mar 2023

    Case Name: Dr. Chillakur Sumalatha & Smt. Justice M.G. Priyadarshini vs Respondent on 01 March, 2023 Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh Date of Judgment: 01 March, 2023 Bench: Dr. Justice Chillakur Sumalatha & Smt. Justice M.G. Priyadarshini Subject: Divorce; Hindu Marriage Act; Cruelty; Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage; Dowry Harassment Key Legal Propositions 1. Where a marriage has broken down irretrievably and attempts at reconciliation fail, divorce should not be withheld, even if fault is not conclusively proven. 2. A long period of separation can be a strong indicator that the matrimonial bond is beyond repair, and forcing parties to remain in such a marriage can cause mental cruelty. 3. While evidence of cruelty or dowry harassment may not be fully established, the court can consider the overall circumstances, including prolonged separation, to grant a divorce if the marriage has irretrievably broken down. Judgment Summary Background: This appeal arises from a Family Court decree dissolving the marriage between the appellant-husband and respondent-wife under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act. The wife alleged cruelty and dowry harassment as grounds for

11. Neeli Bhaskar Raju vs Smt. Prasanna on 23 February, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana23 Feb 2023

    Case Name: Neeli Bhaskar Raju vs Smt. Prasanna on 23 February, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 23 February, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice Sambasivarao Naidu Subject: Family Law – Interim Maintenance – Hindu Marriage Act – Article 227 of Constitution of India Key Legal Propositions 1. A husband is obligated to maintain his wife, even in the absence of conclusive evidence of his income. 2. The quantum of interim maintenance should be reasonable, considering the cost of living, needs, medical expenses, and the financial and social status of the parties. 3. The High Court, exercising jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution, should not readily interfere with a trial court’s order on interim maintenance unless it is demonstrably unreasonable. Judgment Summary Background: This Civil Revision Petition arises from an order of the I Additional Family Court, Ranga Reddy District, directing the petitioner-husband to pay Rs. 10,000/- per month as interim maintenance to the respondent-wife in a pending divorce petition (FCOP No. 1564 of 2016). The petitioner challenged this order, alleging that the trial court incorrectly assessed his i

12. F.C.A.No.56 of 2019 and F.C.A.No.58 of 2019 on 20 January, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana20 Jan 2023

    Case Name: F.C.A.No.56 of 2019 and F.C.A.No.58 of 2019 Court: High Court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh Date of Judgment: 20 January, 2023 Bench: Dr. Justice Chillakur Sumalatha and Smt. Justice M.G.Priyadarsini Subject: Hindu Marriage Act – Restitution of Conjugal Rights – Nullity of Marriage – Prior Marriage – Evidence – Admissibility – Family Court’s Discretion Key Legal Propositions 1. A marriage under Hindu law is complete upon performance of relevant ceremonies, and mere presence of a symbolic item like a yellow thread does not automatically validate a prior marriage. 2. Family Courts are not bound by strict rules of evidence and can adopt a procedure to ascertain the truth and decide matters on their merits, as per Section 14 of the Family Courts Act. 3. Overwhelming evidence establishing a prior marriage, coupled with the appellant’s inability to adequately explain her presence in compromising photographs, justifies the annulment of the subsequent marriage. Judgment Summary Background: The appeals arise from a Family Court order dismissing a petition for restitution of conjugal rights filed by the wife (appellant) and granting the husband’s (respondent) petition f

13. Kumbam Ramana Prathap Reddy vs. Kumbam Jaihind Reddy on 28 August, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana28 Aug 2023

    Case Name: Kumbam Ramana Prathap Reddy vs. Kumbam Jaihind Reddy on 28 August, 2023 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 28 August, 2023 Bench: Smt. Justice M.G. Priyadarshini Subject: Partition of Joint Family Property, Legitimacy of Children, Hindu Marriage Act Key Legal Propositions 1. Children born out of a void marriage are only entitled to a share in the parents' self-acquired property, not in ancestral coparcenary property. 2. Section 16(3) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, limits the rights of children born from void marriages to the property of their parents. 3. The principles laid down in *Neelamma v. Sarojamma* and *Jinia Keotin v. Kumar Sitaram Manjhi* continue to hold good, despite the observations in *Revannasiddappa v. Mallikarjun*, regarding the rights of illegitimate children in joint Hindu family property. Judgment Summary Background: This appeal arises from a suit seeking partition of ancestral properties. The plaintiffs, children of the defendant No. 1 and his second wife, claimed a share in the joint family property. The trial court dismissed the suit, holding that the plaintiffs were not entitled to partition. The

14. Sriramula Santhosh vs Sriramula @ Thangallapalli Kalyani on 10 March, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana10 Mar 2023

    Case Name: Sriramula Santhosh vs Sriramula @ Thangallapalli Kalyani on 10 March, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 10 March, 2023 Bench: Justice Lalitha Kanneganti Subject: Family Law – Interim Maintenance – Hindu Marriage Act Key Legal Propositions 1. The Court below need not interfere with a well-considered order granting interim maintenance when the husband’s earning capacity, as stated by the wife, is not denied. 2. Admitted facts need not be formally proven. 3. While considering maintenance applications, both parties should ideally disclose their assets, liabilities, and other relevant information, as per the guidelines laid down in *Rajnesh vs. Neha*. Judgment Summary Background: This Civil Revision Petition challenges an order of the Family Court, Karimnagar, allowing an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act and granting interim maintenance of ₹12,000 per month to the wife and son, ₹20,000 towards legal expenses, and ₹125 towards conveyance charges. The husband contends that the wife is employed and earning ₹60,000 per month, and that the Court below failed to consider his current unemployment. The wife

15. Kumari Krishna Veni @ Sadhu (Gyni) Krishna Veni vs. Gyni Venkati @ Sadhu Venkati and Another on 22 August, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana22 Aug 2023

    Case Name: Kumari Krishna Veni @ Sadhu (Gyni) Krishna Veni vs. Gyni Venkati @ Sadhu Venkati and Another on 22 August, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 22 August, 2023 Bench: Smt. Justice M.G. Priyadarsini Subject: Partition of Joint Family Property, Legitimacy of Child born out of Void Marriage, Hindu Marriage Act, Succession Rights Key Legal Propositions 1. A child born out of a void marriage may be considered legitimate for certain purposes, but their inheritance rights are limited to the parents’ self-acquired property, not ancestral coparcenary property. 2. Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, while conferring legitimacy on children born of void marriages, does not automatically grant them rights in ancestral properties. 3. The principles established in *Neelamma v. Sarojamma* and *Bharatha Matha v. R. Vijaya Renganathan* remain good law, limiting the rights of children born of void marriages to the self-acquired property of their parents. Judgment Summary Background: The appeal arises from a suit seeking partition of ancestral properties. The plaintiff claims to be the daughter of the defendant No. 1 through his second wif

16. K. Savitha Bai @ Patangay Savitha vs. Patangay Pramod kumar on 05 September, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana5 Sept 2023

    **Case Name:** K. Savitha Bai @ Patangay Savitha vs. Patangay Pramod kumar on 05 September, 2023 **Court:** High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad **Date of Judgment:** 05 September, 2023 **Bench:** Hon'ble Sri Justice K. Lakshman and Hon'ble Smt Justice K. Sujana **Subject:** Family Law – Divorce, Maintenance, Compromise, Withdrawal of Cases **Key Legal Propositions** 1. Courts may enforce compromise agreements between parties, particularly in family law disputes, and dispose of pending litigation accordingly. 2. Mutual consent and a comprehensive settlement agreement can lead to the dissolution of marriage and waiver of claims for maintenance, alimony, and property. 3. Parties are free to negotiate terms of settlement, including phased payments and reciprocal undertakings, subject to judicial approval. **Judgment Summary** **Background:** The appeals and revision petitions arose from a contentious divorce proceeding between the appellant (wife) and respondent (husband). Multiple cases were pending before various courts, including appeals against divorce decrees, criminal revisions related to maintenance, and contempt petitions. The parties reached a Memoran

17. Vinjamuri Gariga Bhavani Lakshmi Surya Deepika vs Vinjamuri Siva Surya Rama Subrahmanya Kameswara Lakshminath Sarma@Siva on 05 December, 2023

    High Court of Andhra Pradesh5 Dec 2023

    Case Name: Vinjamuri Gariga Bhavani Lakshmi Surya Deepika vs Vinjamuri Siva Surya Rama Subrahmanya Kameswara Lakshminath Sarma@Siva on 05 December, 2023 Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati Date of Judgment: 05 December, 2023 Bench: A.V. Sesha Sai J., Sumathi Jagadam J. Subject: Hindu Marriage Act - Appeal for withdrawal of decree. Key Legal Propositions 1. An appeal can be withdrawn with the permission of the court. 2. Upon withdrawal of the appeal, pending miscellaneous petitions stand closed. 3. No costs shall be awarded when an appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. Judgment Summary Background: The appeal (CMA No. 1376 of 2018) was filed under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, challenging an order dated 25.10.2018 in H.M.O.P. No. 138 of 2015. A petition under Section 151 of CPC was also filed seeking suspension of the decree. Held: A. On Appeal Withdrawal: Majority View: The Court granted permission to the appellant to withdraw the appeal. Dissenting View: None. B. On Pending Miscellaneous Petitions: Majority View: All pending miscellaneous petitions were directed to be closed. Dissenting View: None. C. On Costs: Majority View: The Court ordered no costs to

18. Patruni Nagendra Rao vs Smt.Patruni Purnima Durga Satyamouli on 14 December, 2023

    High Court of Andhra Pradesh14 Dec 2023

    Case Name: Patruni Nagendra Rao vs Smt.Patruni Purnima Durga Satyamouli on 14 December, 2023 Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati Date of Judgment: 14 December, 2023 Bench: Justice U. Durga Prasad Rao and Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratap Subject: Divorce; Cruelty; Hindu Marriage Act; Evidence; Adultery Key Legal Propositions 1. Allegations of cruelty, particularly of a grave nature like physical assault or adultery, require convincing proof and cannot be based solely on unsubstantiated claims. 2. Failure to substantiate allegations of cruelty with credible evidence, such as police reports or testimony from independent witnesses, will not meet the legal threshold for granting a divorce. 3. Accusations of unchastity, if unproven, can themselves constitute cruelty, but require substantial evidence to establish the allegation and its impact on the spouse. Judgment Summary Background: This Family Court Appeal (FCA) arises from the dismissal of a divorce petition (FCOP No. 301/2010) by the Additional Family Court, Visakhapatnam. The appellant/petitioner sought dissolution of marriage under Section 13(1)(la) of the Hindu Marriage Act, alleging cruelty by the respondent/

19. (Appellant/Petitioner) vs (Respondent/Respondent) on 16 February 2023

    High Court of Andhra Pradesh16 Feb 2023

    Case Name: High Court of Andhra Pradesh Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh Date of Judgment: 16 February 2023 Bench: Justice M. Ganga Rao, Justice Duppala Venkata Ramana Subject: Family Law – Divorce – Withdrawal of Appeal Key Legal Propositions 1. An appeal becomes non-est when the subject matter is resolved through a subsequent proceeding. 2. Courts may allow withdrawal of appeals when the underlying dispute has been settled. 3. Dismissal of an appeal as withdrawn is appropriate when parties reach a mutual consent divorce decree. Judgment Summary Background: The Family Court Appeal (FCA) No. 426 of 2013 was filed by the Appellant/Petitioner against the Respondent/Respondent. During the pendency of the appeal, the parties filed a petition for divorce by mutual consent (FCOP No. 84 of 2022) before the Family Court, Kurnool. The Family Court decreed the divorce petition on 28.11.2022. The Appellant subsequently sought permission to withdraw the present appeal, submitting that the marriage had been dissolved by mutual consent. Held: A. On Withdrawal of Appeal: Majority View: The Court granted permission to withdraw the appeal, noting that the marriage had been dissolved by a

20. Kodali Koteswara Rao vs Smt. Kodali Kamala Kumari on 31 July, 2023

    High Court of Andhra Pradesh31 Jul 2023

    Case Name: Kodali Koteswara Rao vs Smt. Kodali Kamala Kumari on 31 July, 2023 Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati Date of Judgment: 31 July, 2023 Bench: Justice D.V.S.S. Somayajulu & Justice Duppala Venkata Ramana Subject: Hindu Marriage Act - Appeal against divorce decree - Irretrievable breakdown of marriage - Desertion & Cruelty Key Legal Propositions 1. The Supreme Court, in exercise of power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, alone has the discretion to dissolve a marriage on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown. 2. A Division Bench of the High Court or the Supreme Court judgments dissolving marriage on the ground of irretrievable breakdown are not good law in the absence of specific constitutional power. 3. Mere long-standing litigation between parties, without supporting evidence of cruelty or desertion, is insufficient for dissolution of marriage. Judgment Summary Background: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal arises from a decree and order dated 14.11.2011 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Gudivada, Krishna District, in O.P.No.91/2008, a matrimonial dispute filed under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The appellant, husband, challenges

Search all 1,938 judgments →