SATISH SITOLE versus SMT. GANGA

Citation: [2008] 10 S.C.R. 767 · Decided: 10-07-2008 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ALTAMAS KABIR · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2008] 10 S.C.R. 767 
.-
SMT. GANGA 
A 
(CIVIL APPEAL No. 7567 of 2004) 
JULY 10, 2008 
[ALTAMAS KABIR AND AFTAB ALAM, JJ] 
B 
Constitution of India, 1950: 
Articles 136 and 142 - Complete justice - Final settle-
ment of matrimonial dispute - Marriage of parties having irre-
trievably broken down -All efforts of reconciliation having failed 
- Parties living separately for 14 years - HELD: Since the c 
marriage between the parties is dead for all practical purpdses 
and there is no chance of it being retrieved, continuance of 
such marriage would itself amount to cruelty - In exercise of 
powers under Article 142, directed that the marriage of appel-
/ant and respondent shall stand dissolved subject to the ap-
D 
pellant paying to the respondent a sum of rupees two /akhs by 
way of permanent alimony besides cost of the appeal - Hindu 
Marriage Act, 1955 - ss.13(1)(ia) and (ib). 
The parties were married on 22.5.1992. A male child 
E 
was born out of the wedlock on 28.2.1993. On 21.8.1994 the 
respondent went to her parents and since then never re-
turned to her matrimonial home. The parties took recourse 
to legal proceedings -the appellant tried to bring th~ respon-
-+ 
dent back to her matrimonial home whereas the latter filed a 
complaint against the appellant and his family members u/s 
F 
498-A IPC alleging dowry demand - but neither of them could 
succeed. Ultimately, the husband filed a matrimonial case u/ 
ss 3(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for disso-
lution of the marriage on the grounds of cruelty and deser-
tion. The trial court passed a decree of judicial separation. G 
"'+ 
The High Court allowed the appeal of the wife, dismissed 
the cross appeal of the husband and set aside the judgm~nt 
and decree of the trial court. 
In the instant appeal f~'fd by the husband, it was H 
768 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2008) 10 S.C.R. 
A pleaded for the appellant that having regard to the irre-
trievable breakdown of the marriage, and the parties liv-
ing separately for 14 years, the Court should; in exercise 
of its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, pass 
appropriate orders to end the agony of both the parties. 
B 
Disposing of the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 Despite the attempts· at reconciliation the 
Gordian knot could not be untied and clearly the marriage 
. has broken down irretrievably. [para 7] [771-C] 
:C 
1.2 Since the marriage between the parties is dead 
for all practical purposes and there is no chance of it be-
ing retrieved, the continuance of such marriage would it-
se~f amount to cruelty and, accordingly, in exercise of 
powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, it is directed 
D that the marriage of the appellant and the respondent shall 
stand dissolved, subject to the appellant paying to ~he 
respondent a sum of rupees two lakhs by way of perma-
nent alimony. In addition, the appellant shall also pay the 
costs of the appeal to the respondent, assessed at 
E Rs.25,'000/-. [para 12] [772·-E & F] 
Ramesh Chander V. Savitri (1995) 2 SCC 7; Anjana 
Kishore vs. Puneet Kish6re (2002) 10 SCC 194; Swati Verma 
vs. Rajan Verma and ors. (2004) 1 SCC 1-23; and Ourga 
Prasanna Tripathy vs. Arundhati Tripathy (2005) 7 SCC 352 -
F 
relied on. 
CIVILAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 7567 
of 2004 
·· 
·From the Judgment and Order dated 1.11.2003 of the High 
G Court of M.P. Bench at Indore in F.A. No. 114/2002 . 
Niraj Sharma, Vikrant Singh, Sadhna ~h,wma and Amit 
Singh for the Appellant. 
, : . 
Lily Isabel Thomas, Ashok Panigrahi, Shaju Francis and 
H C'.P. Sharma for the Respondents. 
. 
.L. 
~ 
---
"Y ' 
f 
'} 
+ 
,i 
f 
SATISH SITOLE v. SMT. GANGA 
[ALTAMAS KABIR,J.] 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
769 
A 
ALTAMAS KABIR,J. 1. As far back as on 13.1.1995 two 
Judges of this Court in the case of Ramesh Chander V. Savitri 
(1995) 2 sec 7) had occasion to pose the question as to 
whether a marriage which is otherwise dead emotionally and 
practically s·hould be continued for name sake. In the instant 8 
appeal, we are also faced with the same question. 
2. Marriage between the appellant and the respondent was 
performed on ~2.5.1992 according to Hindu rites and customs. 
On 21.8.1994 the respondent, for whatever reason, left her c 
matrimonial home and went back to her parents and the couple 
have been living separately ever since. Soon thereafter, the 
parties took recourse to the law when on 30 .12 .1994 the appel-
lant sent a notice to the respondent askin

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