JATINDER KUMAR SAPRAversusANUPAMA SAPRA

                  [2024] 5 S.C.R. 879 : 2024 INSC 382

                           Jatinder Kumar Sapra
                                     v.
                              Anupama Sapra
                       (Civil Appeal No. 6088 of 2024)
                                  06 May 2024
           [Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma,* JJ.]

                            Issue for Consideration
       Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, was it a fit case
       for exercising jurisdiction under Article 142(1) of the Constitution of
       India and pass a decree of divorce on the ground of irretrievable
       breakdown of marriage?

                                   Headnotes†
       Factors to be considered by the Supreme Court while exercising
       jurisdiction under Article 142(1) of the Constitution of India
       and pass a decree for divorce on the ground of irretrievable
       breakdown of marriage – Explained:
       Held: Both the Family Court and the High Court of Punjab and
       Haryana had dismissed the petition instituted by the Appellant
       under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking
       dissolution of marriage by way of a decree of divorce. For passing
       a decree of divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of
       marriage under Article 142(1) of the Constitution of India, the
       Supreme Court must be fully satisfied and convinced that the
       marriage is totally unworkable and beyond salvation. For this,
       the Supreme Court must consider the period of time the parties
       cohabited after marriage; when the parties had last cohabited;
       the nature of allegations made by the parties against each other
       and their family members; the orders passed in legal proceedings
       from time to time; cumulative impact on the personal relationship;
       whether attempts were made to settle the disputes by intervention
       of court or through mediation, and when was the last attempt made.
       But these factors are not exhaustive but are rather illustrative.
       Reliance placed on Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan, 2023
       SCC OnLine SC 544. [Paras 2 and 5]
       Case for exercising jurisdiction under Article 142(1) of the
       Constitution of India and passing a decree of divorce on the

* Author
880                                                              [2024] 5 S.C.R.

                        Digital Supreme Court Reports


       ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage – Whether
       made out?
       Held: In the instant case, there was no possibility of the parties
       residing together and/or arrive at an amicable settlement. The parties
       married on 14.10.1991 and last cohabited in January 2002. Out of
       the wedlock, two children were born in 1993 and 1996 respectively.
       The Appellant alleged that the Respondent ill – treated the Appellant
       and constantly acted against him. The Respondent alleged cruelty
       and torture at the hands of the Appellant. Both their children are
       majors now and are gainfully employed. Thus, the facts on record
       establish beyond doubt that the marriage between the parties has
       broken down and that there is no possibility of the parties cohabiting
       ever in the future. Therefore, the Supreme Court considered it to
       be a fit case for exercising its jurisdiction under Article 142(1) of
       the Constitution and passed a decree of divorce on the ground of
       irretrievable breakdown of marriage. [Paras 3, 4, 6, 7 and 8]
       Permanent Alimony payable when decree of divorce passed in
       exercise of jurisdiction under Article 142(1) of the Constitution:
       Held: The Appellant has been gainfully employed by various
       multinational corporations previously and is presently endowed with
       a respectable estate. Accordingly, the Supreme Court deemed it fit
       and proper that the Appellant pays an amount of Rs. 50,00,000/- to
       the wife as permanent alimony in five monthly instalments. [Para 9]

                                Case Law Cited
       Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan [2023] 5 SCR 165 : 2023
       SCC OnLine SC 544 – followed.

                                   List of Acts
       Constitution of India; Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

                                List of Keywords
       Divorce, Irretrievable Breakdown, Cruelty, Permanent Alimony,
       Cohabit, Decree of Divorce.

                               Case Arising From
       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 6088 of 2024
       From the Judgment and Order dated 26.07.2019 of the High Court of
       Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in FAO No. 146 of 2005
[2024] 5 S.C.R.                                                       881

                Jatinder Kumar Sapra v. Anupama Sapra


                        Appearances for Parties
     Tapan Bijoy Deb Choudhury, Tapan Choudhury, Advs. for the
     Appellant.
     Md. Shahid Anwar, Mohd Shahzeb Khan, Mayank Kaushik, Amir
     Naseem, Ajay Amritraj, Hareesh Ahmad Minhaj, Vipul Singhal, Advs.
     for the Respondent.
                Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
                               Judgment
     Satish Chandra Sharma, J.
1.   Leave granted.
2.   The instant appeal assails the correctness of an order dated
     26.07.2019 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana (the
     “High Court”) in FAO-146-M-2005 (O&M) (the “Impugned Order”).
     Pertinently, vide the Impugned Order, the High Court dismissed
     the appeal; and accordingly upheld the correctness of an order
     dated 09.12.2004 passed by the Ld. Additional District Judge (Ad.
     Hoc), Faridabad (the “Family Court”) whereunder the Family Court
     dismissed a petition instituted by the Appellant herein under Section
     13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking dissolution of
     marriage by way of a decree of divorce (the “Underlying Order”).
3.   The Appellant and the Respondent before this Court were married on
     14.10.1991 as per Hindu rites and rituals, at Faridabad, Haryana. Out
     of the wedlock two children were born on 25.08.1993 and 02.05.1996.
4.   Despite being together for approximately 14 (fourteen) years,
     bitterness crept into the relationship between the parties. Whilst on
     one hand, it is alleged that the Respondent ill-treated the Appellant;
     and constantly acted against the Appellant at the behest of her
     parents. On the other hand, the Respondent Wife alleged cruelty
     and torture at the hands of the Appellant Husband.
5.   Despite our best effort(s), the parties were adamant on parting ways
     - citing an irretrievable breakdown of their marriage. Accordingly, it
     was submitted that the marriage between the parties be dissolved
     on the aforesaid ground. Reliance in this regard was placed on a
     decision of this Court in Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan,
     2023 SCC Online SC 544 wherein it was observed that a marriage
882                                                         [2024] 5 S.C.R.

                      Digital Supreme Court Reports


       may be dissolved on the ground of an irretrievable breakdown in
       exercise of the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 142(1) of the
       Constitution of India. This Court in Shilpa Sailesh (Supra) delineated
       various factor(s) to be considered by this Court whilst exercising
       such jurisdiction. The relevant paragraph is reproduced below:
            “41. Having said so, we wish to clearly state that grant
            of divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of
            marriage by this Court is not a matter of right, but a
            discretion which is to be exercised with great care and
            caution, keeping in mind several factors ensuring that
            ‘complete justice’ is done to both parties. It is obvious
            that this Court should be fully convinced and satisfied that
            the marriage is totally unworkable, emotionally dead and
            beyond salvation and, therefore, dissolution of marriage
            is the right solution and the only way forward. That the
            marriage has irretrievably broken down is to be factually
            determined and firmly established. For this, several
            factors are to be considered such as the period of time
            the parties had cohabited after marriage; when the parties
            had last cohabited; the nature of allegations made by
            the parties against each other and their family members;
            the orders passed in the legal proceedings from time
            to time, cumulative impact on the personal relationship;
            whether, and how many attempts were made to settle the
            disputes by intervention of the court or through mediation,
            and when the last attempt was made, etc. The period of
            separation should be sufficiently long, and anything above
            six years or more will be a relevant factor. But these facts
            have to be evaluated keeping in view the economic and
            social status of the parties, including their educational
            qualifications, whether the parties have any children,
            their age, educational qualification, and whether the other
            spouse and children are dependent, in which event how and
            in what manner the party seeking divorce intends to take
            care and provide for the spouse or the children. Question
            of custody and welfare of minor children, provision for fair
            and adequate alimony for the wife, and economic rights of
            the children and other pending matters, if any, are relevant
            considerations. We would not like to codify the factors so
[2024] 5 S.C.R.                                                            883

                Jatinder Kumar Sapra v. Anupama Sapra


           as to curtail exercise of jurisdiction under Article 142(1) of
           the Constitution of India, which is situation specific. Some
           of the factors mentioned can be taken as illustrative, and
           worthy of consideration.”
6.   Having prima-facie satisfied ourselves that the present dispute met
     the aforenoted parameters, we requested Shri P.S. Patwalia, Learned
     Senior Counsel, to assist this Court in putting a quietus to the present
     lis. On 22.03.2024, we were informed by Mr. Patwalia that despite
     his best efforts, the parties were not willing to arrive at an amicable
     settlement and that there was no possibility of the parties residing
     together. At our request, Mr. Patwalia placed on a record a short note
     outlining the details of his efforts including inter alia the deliberations
     between the parties in respect of the quantum of permanent alimony
     to be paid by the Appellant towards the Respondent.
7.   We have given due consideration to submissions made by the
     respective counsels and the materials placed on record. The
     undisputed facts of the case reveal that the parties have separated
     22 (twenty-two) years ago i.e., having cohabited last in January
     2002. The children are now major and gainfully employed; elder son
     is an associate in a dental clinic; and younger son is a video/film
     editor. Thus, keeping in view the totality of circumstances, we are
     satisfied that the facts on record establish that the marriage between
     the parties has broken down and that there is no possibility that the
     parties would cohabit together in the future. Accordingly, we are of
     the considered opinion that the formal union between the parties is
     neither justified nor desirable.
8.   Thus, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the allegations
     levelled inter se the parties, we deem it appropriate to exercise
     our discretion under Article 142(1) of the Constitution of India and
     pass a decree of divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown
     of marriage.
9.   However, considering the fact that the Appellant has previously
     been employed by various multinational corporations in managerial
     post(s); and the fact that the Appellant is presently endowed with
     a respectable estate; we deem it fit and proper that the Appellant
     pays an amount of Rs. 50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakh Only) to the
     Respondent Wife as permanent alimony. The aforesaid amount shall
     be paid to the Respondent Wife as per the following schedule:
884                                                                [2024] 5 S.C.R.

                           Digital Supreme Court Reports



                    Date                               Amount
           May 15, 2024              Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakh Only)
           June 15, 2024             Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakh Only)
           July 15, 2024             Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakh Only)
           August 15, 2024           Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakh Only)
           September 15, 2024        Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakh Only)
10. The appeal stands allowed in the aforesaid terms. The Registry is
    directed to prepare a decree of divorce accordingly. The decree shall
    be handed over to the parties, only after proof of payment of the
    full amount as indicated by us above is furnished to the Registry.
11. Before parting, we place on record our gratitude to Shri P.S. Patwalia,
    Learned Senior Counsel for the assistance rendered to this Court.
12. Pending application(s) (if any), shall stand disposed of.

       Result of the case: Appeal allowed.




       †
           Headnotes prepared by: Raghav Bhatia, Hony. Associate Editor
                                   (Verified by: Liz Mathew, Sr. Adv.)