The Delhi High Court dismissed a husband’s appeal against his contempt conviction, holding that ongoing settlement negotiations cannot excuse non-compliance with binding court orders. The Court upheld directions concerning his passport and reaffirmed the obligation to fulfil maintenance-related financial responsibilities pending resolution of disputes.
The Kerala High Court held that Christian women cannot file divorce petitions from their current place of residence under the Divorce Act, 1869. While dismissing a plea, it urged Parliament to amend the law to align with modern matrimonial statutes.
The Gujarat High Court held that a registered marriage certificate alone cannot validate a Hindu marriage if essential ceremonies under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 were not performed. The Court said registration only proves an already solemnised marriage and cannot create a valid marital bond.
The Allahabad High Court upheld a maintenance order directing a husband to pay his wife, ruling that a PM Awas Yojana house cannot replace maintenance rights. The Court said an able-bodied husband cannot avoid responsibility by claiming unemployment or low income under law.
The Karnataka High Court ruled that maintenance cannot be granted to wives automatically without examining financial circumstances. Justice Chillakur Sumalatha said courts must consider income, independence and responsibilities of both spouses before passing orders, setting aside a direction requiring a husband to pay Rs 20,000 monthly.
The Jharkhand High Court upheld a divorce decree after observing that a 36-year separation had turned the marriage into a “dead wood marriage.” While ending the decades-long relationship, the Court increased permanent alimony for the wife from Rs 10 lakh to Rs 40 lakh.
The Supreme Court dissolved a marriage under Article 142 of the Constitution, holding that the relationship had irretrievably broken down and was “dead for all practical purposes.” The Court set aside decisions of the Family Court and Andhra Pradesh High Court while directing a comprehensive financial settlement.
The Supreme Court held that persistent refusal of sexual relations without reasonable cause constitutes mental cruelty and can be a valid ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act. Upholding a Rajasthan High Court judgment, the Court dismissed a wife’s appeal challenging the dissolution of marriage.
The Madras High Court observed that voluntary removal of the thali may, depending on the facts of a case, cause emotional anguish and amount to mental cruelty. However, the Court clarified that removal of the thali is not automatically a ground for divorce and must be assessed in context.
The Allahabad High Court held that Lok Adalats and District Legal Services Authorities cannot grant divorce decrees, ruling that only family courts possess jurisdiction to dissolve marriages, while Lok Adalats are limited to facilitating settlements and lack authority to exercise judicial powers in matrimonial disputes.
