New Delhi, March 18 (UNI) The Supreme Court on Wednesday held that a divorce decree granted by a United States court on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not enforceable in India where the parties are governed by the Hindu Marriage Act, which does not recognise such a ground.
At the same time, the court dissolved the marriage by invoking its inherent powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, noting that the couple had been living separately since 2008.
While holding that the divorce decree passed by a US circuit court on the grounds of ‘irretrievable breakdown’ of marriage is not enfoceable in India, a bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, having recourse to its inherent powers under Article 142 of the constitution granted divorce noting the long separation and the absence of any subsisting matrimonial relationship between the parties.
The court had passed the order in January.
The order reads, “We do, however, find it necessary to bring a quietus to this matter. The parties have been separated since 2008, nearly eighteen years now, and it is manifest that no matrimonial bond subsists between them. In such circumstances, this Court finds it appropriate to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, and to grant the parties a decree of divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage.”
Deciding the issue, the apex court ad framed two questions – first, whether the foreign decree of divorce is conclusive and binding on the parties; and second, whether, in the facts and circumstances of this case, it is appropriate for this Court to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India.
The court held that the irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not a ground recognised for dissolving marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act that is matrimonial law applicable to the parties as they were married as per Hindu rites and rituals..
The dispute arose from a marriage solemnised in Mumbai in December 2005 according to Hindu rites. The couple later moved to the United States, where they lived together until September 2008. The wife initiated divorce proceedings before a Michigan court, while the husband contested jurisdiction but did not participate further. In 2009, the US court granted divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage along with financial directions.
Parallelly, the husband had approached the Family Court in Pune seeking divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act.
The Family Court upheld its jurisdiction and declined to recognise the foreign decree, holding that the marriage was governed by Indian law and that the ground relied upon abroad was not recognised domestically. However, the Bombay High Court later set aside this finding, taking the view that the parties were domiciled in the United States and that the American court had jurisdiction.
Reversing the March 7, 2010, High Court’s decision, the Supreme Court restored the Family Court’s view. It held that since the marriage was solemnised under Hindu law in India, the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act would continue to govern the parties, regardless of their subsequent residence abroad. The Court also noted that the husband had not submitted to the jurisdiction of the US court and, therefore, could not be bound by its decree.
