Supreme Court - Daily Orders
K. Dhinesh Kumar vs J.G. Aruna on 24 January, 2023
Bench: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Abhay S. Oka
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Civil Appeal No(s). 500/2023
(arising out of SLP (C) No.16076/2019 )
K. DHINESH KUMAR Appellant(s)
VERSUS
J.G. ARUNA Respondent(s)
O R D E R
Leave granted.
The parties entered into a matrimonial arrangement on 01.6.2006 and the marriage ceremonies were performed as per Hindu rites and customs at Salem. It appears that the marriage did not work out from the inception. In fact the allegation of the appellant-husband is that the marriage has not even been consummated.
The strained relationship between the parties resulted in the appellant filing a divorce petition on grounds of cruelty under Section 13 (1) (i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The post trial divorce petition was dismissed vide Order dated 11.12.2013 whereupon the appellant preferred an appeal which has been dismissed by the impugned judgment dated 10.1.2019.
Notice was issued in the matter on 19.7.2019 recording the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that what was Signature Not Verified now Digitally signed by RASHMI DHYANI Date: 2023.02.01 being sought was a decree of divorce as the marriage had 10:20:54 IST Reason:
irrevocably broken down as the parties had been living separately 1 for 14 years. The mediation endeavour in pursuance to that order has also not produced any fruitful result.
We put to learned counsel for parties that what was a period of 14 years is now 16 years and the parties have not lived together from the very inception of the marriage. It is not a question of putting a blame on one or the other but there can hardly be any doubt that this is a case of irretrievable breakdown of marriage and this Court is required to step in to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. We are fortified in our view by the pronouncement of judgment in 2021 SCC Online SC 702 titled “Sivasankaran Vs. Santhimeenal” dated 13.9.2021.
The aforesaid being the position, we endeavour to workout a solution for permanent alimony. Both the parties are gainfully employed though the appellant is earning more than the respondent. Some figures were mentioned by both the sides but ultimately at the suggestion of the Court it is agreed that an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- be paid to the respondent as full and final settlement of all her claims arising from the matrimony.
At the request of learned counsel for the appellant, a period of three months is granted to make the payment.
In view of the permanent alimony being settled at the willingness of the parties to go for a decree of divorce, apart from the fact of irretrievable breakdown of marriage, we are inclined to grant a decree of divorce by exercising our jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India.
Sixteen years is too long a period of time for the parties to 2 stay apart and that too from the inception of the marriage and it is the time for the parties to go their separate ways to lead their lives on their own terms.
A decree of divorce be accordingly drawn up which would however be released on the proof of payment of the amount being filed in Court.
The appeal is accordingly allowed leaving parties to bear their own costs.
………………………………………………………J. (SANJAY KISHAN KAUL) ………………………………………………………J. (ABHAY S. OKA) NEW DELHI 24th January, 2023 3 ITEM NO.17 COURT NO.2 SECTION XII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 16076/2019 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 10-01-2019 in CMA No. 1151/2014 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Madras) K. DHINESH KUMAR Appellant(s) VERSUS J.G. ARUNA Respondent(s) (Mediation report received.
IA No. 100775/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) Date : 24-01-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA For Appellant(s) Mr. B. Balaji, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Beno Bencigar, Adv.
Mr. Parijat Kishore, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.
The appeal stands allowed in terms of the signed order. Pending application(s) stands disposed of.
(RASHMI DHYANI PANT) (POONAM VAID) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
(signed order is placed on the file)0 4