Foreign Divorce Decree On Ground Of 'Irretrievable Breakdown' Not Enforceable In India: Supreme Court
A decree of divorce passed by a court in the United States of America (USA) on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not enforceable in India, observed the Supreme Court.This is because irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not recognised as a ground for divorce under the Indian law. Here, parties were married as per the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA).“…the US Court granted...
A decree of divorce passed by a court in the United States of America (USA) on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not enforceable in India, observed the Supreme Court.
This is because irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not recognised as a ground for divorce under the Indian law. Here, parties were married as per the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA).
“…the US Court granted a decree of divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage. This ground is not recognised under the HMA, which is the matrimonial law applicable to the parties.”, observed a bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta.
Background
The parties were married in Mumbai in December 2005 according to Hindu rites but were residing in the United States. After briefly staying together in Pune during a visit to India in 2007, they continued cohabitation in the US until September 2008. Soon thereafter, the wife initiated divorce proceedings before a Michigan court in the US. The husband contested jurisdiction through a written response but did not participate further.
In February 2009, the US court granted a divorce on the ground of “irretrievable breakdown of marriage” and passed consequential financial directions. Meanwhile, the husband had filed a divorce petition before the Family Court in Pune under the Hindu Marriage Act.
The Pune Family Court upheld its jurisdiction, noting that the marriage was solemnised in India and that the foreign decree was based on a ground not recognised under Indian law. However, the Bombay High Court reversed this finding, holding that the parties were domiciled in the US and that the American court had jurisdiction.
Setting aside the High Court's decision, the Court restored the family court's decision to allow the Appellant-husband's application of divorce, noting that since the couple tied knot in India as per the Hindu rites and rituals, irrespective of the fact that they have settled abroad, they would be bound by the Hindu Marriage Act for divorce proceedings. Also, it negated the applicability of the foreign decree when the Appellant-husband have never submitted to the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court in the US and had not participated in those proceedings.
“Since the marriage was solemnised according to Hindu rites and rituals in India, the HMA would apply to the parties even if they had settled abroad thereafter.”, the court said, adding that the appellant-husband had never submitted to the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court in the US and had not participated in those proceedings to be bound by the foreign decree.
“It is found that the matrimonial home was at Aungh, Pune, as the parties had stayed there during their visits to India, even if briefly, and that it was the place where they last resided together in India.”, the court further stated, nullifying the enforceability of the foreign decree.
Despite holding the foreign decree invalid, the Court, in exercise of its inherent power under Article 142 of the Constitution, granted a divorce to the couple on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown of marriage, because the couple had been living apart since 2008, and no matrimonial bond exists between them.
Cause Title: K VERSUS K