Case at a Glance
A husband obtained divorce for cruelty, which the Delhi High Court affirmed. Before the Supreme Court, the wife did not seek to reverse the divorce but asked only for ₹10 lakh for their daughter's marriage. The husband claimed to have no income. The Court held that the marriage had ceased to exist in substance and upheld the divorce, but directed the husband to pay ₹10 lakh for the daughter's marriage by 15 October 2025, failing which the appeals would be revived.
Background
The parties married on 6 May 1996 and have a daughter, born in 1997, and a son, born in 1999. In March 2009 the husband filed for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The wife filed a domestic violence complaint, in which she was awarded maintenance of ₹6,300 a month, later ₹7,500. In 2013 the husband sought DNA tests of both children, claiming they were not his. On appeal in the domestic violence case he was found guilty of domestic violence and directed to pay ₹2,00,000, which the High Court enhanced to ₹7,00,000 on 9 November 2022; the Supreme Court dismissed his SLP on 27 March 2023.
The Family Court granted divorce for cruelty on 20 September 2019 (HMA No. 299 of 2019). On 18 December 2023 the Delhi High Court affirmed it (MAT.APP.(F.C.) No. 20 of 2020), finding constant acrimony, repeated police complaints by the wife and separation since around 2009. Mediation before the Supreme Court failed.
The Question Before the Court
Should the divorce be disturbed, and what provision should be made for the daughter's marriage?
A Modest Obligation
The Court held that the marital relationship had ceased to exist in substance. Given the long separation and the irretrievable breakdown, it saw no reason to interfere with the decree of divorce. The wife had limited her claim to ₹10 lakh for the daughter's marriage, saying the husband earned from an aquarium shop, rent and contributions from his father; the husband, appearing in person, said he had no income.
The Court did not resolve the competing income claims in detail, but was satisfied that the husband could provide for his daughter's marriage. It noted that the wife had acted reasonably in limiting her claim and had largely raised the children alone. Meeting a daughter's marriage expenses, it said, is a father's duty and a modest obligation. No precedents are cited.
What the Court Held
- The marriage had ceased to exist in substance, and the decree of divorce was affirmed.
- The husband was capable of providing for his daughter's marriage, despite his claim of no income.
- He must pay ₹10 lakh to the wife for the daughter's marriage on or before 15 October 2025; the wife must give him her bank details.
- If he defaults, the Registry must revive the appeals for further orders.
Why It Matters
- A father's obligation towards a daughter's marriage expenses was enforced as a condition attached to the divorce.
- The Court used a revival clause to secure payment without reopening the divorce immediately.
- A limited, reasonable claim can carry weight with the Court.
For Litigants / For Counsel
For litigants
- If you accept the divorce, you can still seek specific financial relief for the children.
- Claiming no income may not persuade the Court if other evidence suggests otherwise.
For counsel
- Consider narrowing relief to a focused, reasonable claim.
- Ask for a revival or default clause to secure compliance.
Key Takeaways
- The divorce for cruelty was affirmed.
- ₹10 lakh was ordered for the daughter's marriage.
- The deadline was 15 October 2025.
- Default would revive the appeals.
FAQs
Did the wife lose the appeal?
She did not get the divorce reversed, but she obtained ₹10 lakh for the daughter's marriage, which was what she limited her claim to.
Why did the Court believe the husband could pay?
It was satisfied about his capacity to pay, without deciding the exact income dispute.
What if the husband does not pay?
The Registry must revive the appeals for further orders.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court left the divorce in place but made sure the father met a basic duty to his daughter, backed by a clear deadline and a default clause.
Practical takeaway: in a final divorce appeal, a focused claim for children's needs can succeed even where the decree itself stands.