Supreme Court Grants Divorce on Ground of Irretrievable Breakdown: A Case of Failed Matrimonial Union

The case of MUNISH KAKKAR vs. NIDHI KAKKAR revolves around a deeply contested divorce proceeding, where the husband sought a decree of divorce based on alleged cruelty and the breakdown of marriage. The parties, who had been embroiled in a series of legal disputes over the years, were granted a divorce by the Supreme Court, which ruled on the basis of irretrievable breakdown of marriage. This case illustrates the complexities of marital disputes, particularly when both parties continue their lives in a bitter state of separation for years.

Background of the Case

The marriage between the appellant, Munish Kakkar, and the respondent, Nidhi Kakkar, was solemnized on April 23, 2000, in Jalandhar according to Hindu rites. The parties had barely stayed together for two months after their marriage, with the respondent moving to Canada in May 2001. The primary issue that triggered the dispute was the respondent’s prolonged absence from the marital home, which ultimately led to her obtaining Canadian citizenship in August 2002. During this time, the appellant claimed that his wife was not interested in living together in India and had effectively abandoned him. He further claimed that the respondent kept pressuring him to immigrate to Canada, which he was reluctant to do.

As per the appellant, their marriage started facing difficulties shortly after the respondent left for Canada, including allegations of cruelty, mental torture, and non-cohabitation. The appellant filed for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, on May 16, 2003, citing the respondent’s cruelty, abandonment, and their inability to live together for years.

The respondent, however, had a different version of events. She claimed that she left for Canada at the appellant’s insistence, intending to bring him along. However, due to incomplete immigration paperwork, the appellant never joined her in Canada. She also accused the appellant of physical assault, dowry demands, and extra-marital affairs. The respondent, who had been residing in Canada since 2002, argued that her stay there was necessary due to health reasons and the inability to live with the appellant under the circumstances.

Key Legal Issues

The Supreme Court was tasked with addressing the following crucial issues:

• Whether the appellant was justified in seeking a divorce on the grounds of cruelty and irretrievable breakdown of marriage.
• Whether the accusations of extra-marital affairs and physical abuse were substantiated by evidence.
• Whether the appellant’s claim of abandonment and cruelty by the respondent was legitimate, considering the parties’ prolonged separation.
• Whether the concept of irretrievable breakdown of marriage can be applied in this case, even though the grounds for divorce in India still primarily adhere to fault-based theories.

Arguments by the Petitioner (Munish Kakkar)

The appellant, represented by Mr. Sandeep Singh, presented the following arguments:

• The appellant’s marriage had deteriorated to such an extent that it had become emotionally dead, with no prospect of reconciliation.
• There was no meaningful attempt by the respondent to continue their relationship after she left for Canada in 2001.
• The appellant had been subject to continuous mental torture and humiliation due to the respondent’s abandonment and her allegations of extra-marital affairs.
• The respondent’s allegations against the appellant were baseless, as there was no evidence to support the claims of physical assault and extra-marital affairs.
• Despite several attempts at mediation and intervention by the family, the respondent refused to reconcile, leaving the appellant with no choice but to file for divorce.

Arguments by the Respondent (Nidhi Kakkar)

The respondent, represented by Ms. Pooja R. Agarwal, argued the following points:

• The respondent had been forced to leave for Canada due to the appellant’s reluctance to join her, and she had not abandoned him intentionally.
• The appellant’s accusations of cruelty and abandonment were exaggerated and unfounded, as she had been trying to bring him to Canada for the sake of their marriage.
• She claimed that the appellant was responsible for their failed marriage, as he was the one who pushed for the immigration process despite his refusal to follow through.
• The allegations of extra-marital affairs and dowry demands were fabricated, and the appellant’s version of events was unreliable.
• The respondent insisted that she wanted to remain married, but the appellant’s behavior and actions left her with no choice but to live separately.

Supreme Court’s Observations and Ruling

The Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and K.M. Joseph, observed the following:

1. The Concept of Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage

The Court acknowledged the growing acceptance of the concept of irretrievable breakdown of marriage in judicial practice, even though it is not explicitly mentioned in the Indian divorce laws:

“The concept of irretrievable breakdown of marriage is one that is gaining ground in our judicial system, where the parties have lost all emotional and personal connection, and attempts at reconciliation have failed. The situation in this case reflects the classic elements of such a marriage, where both parties have emotionally disconnected and cannot continue together.”

The Court emphasized that the continuous separation of the parties for over 16 years and their unwillingness to reconcile justified applying this principle to grant a divorce.

2. Fault and No-Fault Divorce

The Court highlighted that while divorce laws in India are traditionally based on the fault theory, it has occasionally applied the irretrievable breakdown doctrine to dissolve marriages where no fault is attributed to either party:

“While fault-based divorce remains the statutory norm, this Court has exercised its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to grant divorce based on the irretrievable breakdown of marriage, where the marriage has completely broken down, and reconciliation is not a feasible option.”

The Court noted that in cases where marriages have become emotionally dead and unworkable, divorce should be granted as a means of allowing both parties to move on with their lives.

3. Allegations of Extra-Marital Affairs and Physical Assault

The Court noted that the accusations of extra-marital affairs and physical abuse made by both parties were not substantiated:

“There is no conclusive evidence to support the allegations of extra-marital affairs or physical assault. Such accusations are often made in the heat of the moment and do not have a lasting impact on the reality of the relationship.”

The Court rejected these allegations and focused on the emotional breakdown of the marriage.

4. Emotional and Psychological Impact of the Separation

The Court acknowledged the emotional toll that the prolonged separation had taken on both parties:

“The counselor’s report has emphasized that the emotional damage caused by the prolonged separation and continuous legal battles has left both parties bitter and resentful. The marriage, in its present form, is a source of emotional and psychological distress to both parties.”

The Court concluded that both parties would be better off living separately, as the marriage had become a source of continuous conflict and emotional trauma.

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court granted the appellant’s request for a divorce, dissolving the marriage between the parties:

“The marriage between the parties is hereby dissolved, and a decree of divorce is granted, in exercise of our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. The parties are free to go their separate ways.”

The Court also directed the appellant to continue paying a monthly maintenance amount of Rs. 7,500 to the respondent until further proceedings are filed for any adjustment or cessation of the amount.

Implications of the Judgment

This ruling has far-reaching implications for matrimonial law in India:

• Recognition of Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage: The judgment reinforces the growing acceptance of irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a valid ground for divorce, even though it is not explicitly mentioned in Indian divorce laws.
• Encouragement of Emotional Well-Being: The Court emphasized the emotional distress caused by continuing a marriage that has become psychologically dead and recommended dissolution to allow both parties to heal and move forward.
• Judicial Discretion: The Court highlighted its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to grant relief in cases where statutory laws fall short of providing justice, ensuring that complete justice is achieved for the parties involved.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s ruling in MUNISH KAKKAR vs. NIDHI KAKKAR is a significant development in matrimonial law, as it grants divorce based on the irretrievable breakdown of marriage. By acknowledging the emotional and psychological toll that prolonged separation has on both parties, the Court has paved the way for more compassionate and equitable resolutions to marital disputes.

Petitioner Name: Munish Kakkar.
Respondent Name: Nidhi Kakkar.
Judgment By: Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Justice K.M. Joseph.
Place Of Incident: Delhi.
Judgment Date: 17-12-2019.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Munish Kakkar vs Nidhi Kakkar Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 17-12-2019.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Alimony and Maintenance
See all petitions in Child Custody
See all petitions in Domestic Violence
See all petitions in Property Division in Divorce Cases
See all petitions in Judgment by Sanjay Kishan Kaul
See all petitions in Judgment by K.M. Joseph
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments December 2019
See all petitions in 2019 judgments

See all posts in Divorce Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Divorce Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Divorce Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Divorce Cases Category