GEETA @ REETA MISHRAversusAJAY KUMAR MISHRA

                 [2025] 9 S.C.R. 640 : 2025 INSC 1102

                          Geeta @ Reeta Mishra
                                   v.
                           Ajay Kumar Mishra
                 (Civil Appeal No(s). 11787-11792 of 2025)
                              12 September 2025
               [Vikram Nath* and Sandeep Mehta, JJ.]


                            Issue for Consideration
       The High Court has affirmed the decree of divorce granted by the
       Family Court vide order dated 20.09.2019. Whether respondent-
       husband should contribute towards the marriage expenses of his
       daughter.

                                   Headnotes†
       Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – s.13(1)(ia) – Divorce on grounds
       of cruelty – Family Court granted divorce on grounds of
       cruelty – The High Court, by the impugned judgment, affirmed
       the decree of divorce – Before this Court, the appellant-wife
       has confined her claim to seeking an amount of Rs.10,00,000/-
       towards the marriage expenses of their daughter:
       Held: It is evident that the marital relationship between the parties
       has ceased to exist in substance – Even an attempt at mediation
       proved unsuccessful – In view of the long separation and irretrievable
       breakdown of the marriage, there is no reason to interfere with the
       decree of divorce granted by the Family Court and affirmed by the
       High Court – As far as expense towards marriage of daughter is
       concerned, the respondent is capable of making provision for his
       daughter’s marriage – The appellant-wife has been reasonable in
       limiting her claim – It is a father’s duty to provide for his children,
       and meeting the marriage expenses of his daughter is a modest
       obligation – This Court is of the considered view that the respondent
       can and should contribute Rs.10,00,000/- for this purpose as
       meeting the reasonable expenses of his daughter’s marriage is a
       natural extension of his duty as a parent, irrespective of differences
       with the spouse – Accordingly, the respondent-husband is directed
       to pay an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- to the appellant-wife towards


* Author
[2025] 9 S.C.R.                                                         641

              Geeta @ Reeta Mishra v. Ajay Kumar Mishra


     the marriage expenses of their daughter – In case of default, the
     Registry to revive these appeals – The decree of divorce granted
     by the Trial Court and affirmed by the High Court stands affirmed
     subject to the direction issued. [Paras 7, 8, 9, 10, 12]

                               List of Acts
     Hindu Marriage Act, 1955; Protection of Women from Domestic
     Violence Act, 2005.

                            List of Keywords
     Divorce; Cruelty; Divorce on grounds of cruelty; Marriage expense
     of daughter.

                            Case Arising From
     CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No(s).
     11787-11792 of 2025
     From the Judgment and Order dated 18.12.2023 of the High Court
     of Delhi at New Delhi in MATAPP (FC) No. 20 of 2020, CMAPPL
     Nos. 2101 and 5971 of 2020, CMAPPL Nos. 13309. 26161 and
     25425 of 2023

                        Appearances for Parties
     Advs. for the Appellant:
     Ms. Astha Sharma, Sanjeev Kaushik, Simranjeet Singh Rekhi.
     Respondent-in-person

                Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court

                                Judgment
     Vikram Nath, J.
1.   Leave granted.
2.   The present appeals arise from the judgment and order dated 18th
     December 2023 passed by the High Court of Delhi in MAT.APP.(F.C.)
     No.20 of 2020, whereby the High Court affirmed the decree of divorce
     granted by the Family Court vide order dated 20th September 2019.
3.   The relevant facts, in brief, are as follows:
642                                                        [2025] 9 S.C.R.

                          Supreme Court Reports


       3.1. The parties were married on 6th May 1996 and have two
            children from the marriage: a daughter born in 1997 and a son
            born in 1999.
       3.2. In March 2009, the respondent-husband filed a divorce petition
            being HMA No.135/2009 under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu
            Marriage Act, 19551, on the ground of cruelty. The husband
            alleged various instances of mental cruelty by the wife, whereas
            the wife contended that she herself had been subjected to
            mental and physical cruelty.
       3.3. The appellant-wife thereafter filed a complaint under Section
            12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,
            20052 against the respondent-husband and his family members.
       3.4. In the DV Act proceedings, the Mahila Court directed the husband
            to pay maintenance of Rs.6,300/- per month, later enhanced
            to Rs.7,500/- per month.
       3.5. In 2013, the respondent-husband moved an application in
            the DV Act proceedings seeking DNA testing of both children,
            claiming they were not his. Eventually, the main complaint under
            the DV Act was dismissed. On appeal, the appellate Court, by
            order dated 31st July 2019, held the respondent-husband guilty
            of domestic violence and directed him to pay Rs.2,00,000/- to
            the appellant-wife. This was enhanced to Rs.7,00,000/- by
            the High Court on 9th November 2022 in a revision filed by
            the appellant-wife. The Special Leave Petition filed by the
            respondent-husband challenging the said order was dismissed
            by this Court on 27th March 2023.
       3.6. Meanwhile, the Family Court, vide order dated 20th September
            2019 in HMA No.299 of 2019, granted divorce on the ground
            of cruelty. The appellant-wife challenged this before the High
            Court of Delhi in MAT.APP.(F.C.) No.20 of 2020.
       3.7. The High Court, by the impugned judgment, affirmed the decree
            of divorce. It observed that the parties had been in constant
            acrimony since the inception of their marriage, leading the wife



1   HMA.
2   DV Act.
[2025] 9 S.C.R.                                                        643

              Geeta @ Reeta Mishra v. Ajay Kumar Mishra


           to make repeated complaints to the police. The High Court held
           that lodging false complaints amounted to cruelty. It also noted
           that the parties have lived separately since around 2009, with
           no attempt at reconciliation.
     3.8. Aggrieved, the appellant-wife has preferred these appeals.
4.   We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and the respondent
     appearing in person.
5.   Before this Court, the appellant-wife has confined her claim to seeking
     an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) towards the
     marriage expenses of their daughter.
6.   The appellant-wife submits that the respondent-husband earns from
     running an aquarium shop, rental income from his properties, and
     contributions from his father. The respondent denies these claims
     and states that he has no earnings whatsoever.
7.   It is evident that the marital relationship between the parties has
     ceased to exist in substance. Even an attempt at mediation before
     us proved unsuccessful. Since the appeals are pressed only to the
     limited extent of payment of a certain amount, and in view of the long
     separation and irretrievable breakdown of the marriage, we find no
     reason to interfere with the decree of divorce granted by the Family
     Court and affirmed by the High Court.
8.   As regards the issue of contribution for the daughter’s marriage, the
     parties have taken conflicting stands on the respondent’s income.
     Nevertheless, on our consideration of the record and submissions,
     we are satisfied that the respondent is capable of making provision
     for his daughter’s marriage.
9.   It is clear that the litigation between the parties has been prolonged
     and acrimonious. Yet, the appellant-wife has been reasonable in
     limiting her claim before us. She has raised and supported both
     children largely on her own. It is a father’s duty to provide for his
     children, and meeting the marriage expenses of his daughter is a
     modest obligation. We are of the considered view that the respondent
     can and should contribute Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) for
     this purpose as meeting the reasonable expenses of his daughter’s
     marriage is a natural extension of his duty as a parent, irrespective
     of differences with the spouse.
644                                                        [2025] 9 S.C.R.

                              Supreme Court Reports


10. Accordingly, the respondent-husband is directed to pay an amount
    of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) to the appellant-wife
    towards the marriage expenses of their daughter on or before 15th
    October 2025. In case of default, the Registry shall revive these
    appeals for further consideration and appropriate orders.
11. The appellant-wife shall provide her bank account details to the
    respondent-husband to facilitate payment.
12. The decree of divorce granted by the Trial Court and affirmed by
    the High Court stands affirmed subject to the direction contained in
    paragraph 10 above.
13. In view of the above directions, the appeals stand disposed of.
14. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

       Result of the case: Appeals disposed of.




       †
           Headnotes prepared by: Ankit Gyan