Invoking Article 142, the Supreme Court dissolved an irretrievably broken marriage, holding that its continuance would only prolong agony. The Court granted divorce despite trial and High Court findings, stressing complete justice over rigid statutory grounds of law.
The Supreme Court observed that no husband or wife can claim to be independent in a continuing marriage, stressing that matrimony means mutual dependence. The bench asked the estranged couple to reconcile for the sake of their young children.
The Supreme Court held that continuing criminal proceedings after divorce, without specific allegations, only prolongs bitterness and burdens the justice system. The ruling came while quashing an FIR against a man and his family in a matrimonial dispute.
The Supreme Court dissolved a marriage under Article 142 after 9 years of litigation across 3 states, marking a historic resolution through mutual consent and mediation.
The Supreme Court advised the Balakot fighter pilot and his wife, involved in a bitter matrimonial dispute, to forgive each other and move on. “Do not lead a life of revenge, just forgive and forget,” it said.
In a heated matrimonial dispute, Supreme Court’s CJI Gavai warned the mother, “Mediation or jail, your choice,” over alleged parental alienation, stressing, “You’re spoiling her mind; it will backfire.”
Today, On 22nd July, CJI Gavai slams woman’s Rs.12 crore alimony demand after 18-month marriage, questions her need for a BMW despite being highly educated. Says, “You even want a BMW? You’re so educated, learn to earn!”
In a matrimonial dispute case, the Supreme Court reversed its custody order, citing the emotional stress the child suffered due to separation from his mother. Child welfare remains paramount.
The Bombay High Court observed that Hindu marriages, considered sacrosanct, are increasingly being jeopardized due to trivial issues between couples.
Bombay High Court ruled that an under-construction flat not in possession of either spouse doesn’t qualify as a “shared household” under the DV Act. Hence, the husband cannot be forced to pay pending EMIs.
