Summary
Spouses had lived apart for over twenty-two years and efforts at reunion had failed. The Court exercised Article 142 to dissolve their irretrievably broken marriage despite the wife’s opposition, while protecting her financial interests through permanent alimony and continuing maintenance until payment.
Issues
- Whether the Supreme Court could dissolve an irretrievably broken marriage under Article 142 without both spouses’ consent.
Held
- The parties’ prolonged separation, failed efforts to continue the marriage and absence of any possibility of reunion established that the marriage was beyond repair. This justified exercising Article 142 even where the facts did not supply a statutory ground for divorce. (¶¶ 5.1, 5.2, 7)
- Consent of both spouses is not a prerequisite to dissolution through Article 142; mutual consent has its own statutory route. Exercise of the constitutional power depends on the circumstances and must also protect the wife’s future financial interests. (¶¶ 6, 7)
Result
The appeal was allowed without costs and the marriage dissolved under Article 142, conditional on the husband paying ₹20 lakh permanent alimony directly by demand draft within eight weeks. Existing maintenance was to continue until payment.