Neeti Malviya, T.P. (C) No. 899 of 2007 was rendered infructuous.

_____

My Lord, Court can grant divorce in exercise of power under Article 142(1), in spite of opposition, when there is complete and irretrievable breakdown of marriage?

Yes.

There is a difference between existence of a power and exercising same. Court should not philosophise on modalities of married life. N.G. Dastane v. S. Dastane, (1975) 2 SCC 326 held, ‘satisfied’ must connote satisfaction on ‘preponderance of probabilities’ and not ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’.

Sivasankaran v. Santhimeenal, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 702 observed, there was no necessity of consent by both parties to dissolve a marriage on ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage. It is not a matter of right. It is a discretion which is to be exercised with great care and caution [Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur, (2017) 8 SCC 746].

However, in Poonam v. Sumit, (2010) 4 SCC 460 it was rightly held, parties should not be permitted to file a Writ Petition under Article 32 or under 226 and seek divorce on ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage. We accept this view in Poonam.

 – Hon’ble Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan, [Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 1118 of 2014].

_____

Court can exercise its inherent power under Article 142 to dissolve a marriage when convinced, no useful purpose, emotional or practical, would be served by continuing a soured relationship; marriage is completely dead.

Court in Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan, (2022) 15 SCC 754 and Kiran Jyot Maini v. Anish Pramod Patel, (2024) SCC OnLine SC 1724 opined, factors to be examined include period of cohabitation, period of separation, attempts made for reconciliation, nature and gravity of allegations made and such other similar factors.

– Hon’ble Justice Vikram Nath, Parvin Kumar Jain v. Anju Jain, [Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 21710-21711 of 2024] decided on 10.12.2024.