Sanjeeta Das vs Tapan Kumar Mohanty

The Respondent-husband and the Appellant-wife were married in accordance with Hindu religious rites. About three years after their marriage, the Respondent filed a petition (Civil Proceeding No. 136 of 1997) before the Family Court, Rourkela for dissolution of his marriage with the Appellant on grounds of cruelty and desertion [Clauses (ia) and (ib) of Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955]. The Appellant strongly resisted the grounds taken by the Respondent for dissolution of their marriage and took the plea that, in reality, she had been deserted and subjected to cruelty by the Respondent. The family court ordered cohabitation invoking Section 23 of the Act. In appeal, the Respondent husband expressed his willingness to pay Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakh only) as life term maintenance of the Appellant and for the expenses of the marriage of their daughter Kumari Ayushi Mohanty (Richi), in consideration of the dissolution of his marriage with the Appellant by a decree of divorce and compounding of a criminal case instituted against him by the Appellant. The Respondent further stated in the affidavit that he would pay Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh only) within 4 months from the date of passing of the decree of divorce and the balance amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh only) in 4 equal installments spread over a period of 2 years from the date of the passing of the decree of divorce. The High Court in its order dated September 2, 2009 paraphrased the statements made in the affidavit filed by the Respondent and made it the order of the court. The order dated September 2,2009 was later modified by order dated November 20, 2009 to the further advantage of the Respondent. It was clarified that the payment of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) was not only for the lifetime maintenance of the Appellant but also for the maintenance of the daughter, Kumari Ayushi Mohanty (Richi) till she got married besides the expenses that might be incurred for her marriage. The Appellant-wife challenged the judgment of the High Court before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held that a Hindu marriage can be dissolved only on any of the grounds plainly and clearly enumerated u/s 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The law does not permit the purchase of a decree of divorce for consideration, with or without the consent of the other side. The consent of the parties is of no relevance in the matter. No court can assume jurisdiction to dissolve a Hindu marriage simply on the basis of the consent of the parties de hors the grounds enumerated u/s 13 of the Act, unless of course the consenting parties proceed u/s 13B of the Act. The Apex Court set aside the order of the High Court and directed the High Court to hear and dispose of the appeal in accordance with law.