The Supreme Court ruled that a US divorce granted on “irretrievable breakdown of marriage” is not valid under the Hindu Marriage Act. However, using Article 142, the Court granted divorce to the couple after 18 years of separation.
The Chhattisgarh High Court set aside a Family Court order rejecting a mutual-consent divorce petition because the husband belonged to a Scheduled Tribe, ruling that Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 protections cannot bar couples married under Hindu customs.
The Bombay High Court ruled that WhatsApp chats alone cannot justify granting divorce without giving the other spouse a chance to respond. The Bench of Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande set aside an ex parte divorce order passed by a Nashik family court.
A Delhi family court ruled that Shikhar Dhawan signed property settlement papers under coercion, extortion and fraud. The court ordered his ex-wife to return Rs 5.7 crore with 9% annual interest and held that the Australian court had no jurisdiction.
The Delhi High Court set aside a Family Court order denying waiver of the mandatory one-year waiting period for mutual consent divorce. A bench of Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Renu Bhatnagar held that forcing a non-consummated marriage causes hardship.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed a husband’s demand for a medical examination to prove his wife’s alleged refusal to engage in sexual relations. The Court called it “nothing but invasion of privacy,” slamming down his virginity-test plea.
Orissa High Court rules that a second marriage during the lifetime of the first wife is void under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Consequently, the second wife is not entitled to a family pension under the Odisha Civil Services Rules.
The Gauhati High Court dismissed a Regular Second Appeal, reaffirming that a Civil Judge (Junior Division) cannot dissolve a Muslim marriage or authenticate talaq. Only the District Judge can decide matrimonial disputes where no Family Court exists.
The Supreme Court allowed the wife’s transfer plea, noting she had no independent income and was entirely dependent on her family. The Court shifted the husband’s restitution of conjugal rights case to her home district for convenience and justice.
The Delhi High Court has ruled that the one-year separation requirement under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act is not mandatory. Courts may waive this condition in exceptional cases to prevent undue hardship to parties.
