LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
⚖️ Ask the AI about your situation:🚗 Car Accident💼 Work / Job🏠 Housing / Eviction👪 Family / Divorce📋 Contract Dispute💰 Money Owed

GEETA @ REETA MISHRA versus AJAY KUMAR MISHRA

Citation: [2025] 9 S.C.R. 640 · Decided: 12-09-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: VIKRAM NATH · Disposal: Disposed off

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

[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

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.