While disloving marriage of a couple the bench of Justices SK Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia, the Court held that Continued bitterness, dead emotions and long separation, in the given facts and circumstances of a case, can be construed as a case of “irretrievable breakdown of marriage”, which is also a facet of “cruelty”.
Raising its concern, the court further held that, "The husband and wife have been living separately, the wife is at Udaipur (district Gomati), Tripura and husband at Agartala, Tripura for the last years. Nothing would give us more satisfaction if the two could work out their differences and decide to live together, if only for the sake of their child. But under the circumstances, with the rigid attitude of both the parties, who have failed to appreciate the beauty of compromise, we have been forced to convince ourselves, albeit regrettably, that the two cannot now live together. Twelve years of separation is a sufficiently long period of time to have sapped all emotions which the two perhaps may have had once for each other. We therefore cannot take the same hopeful view as that of the High Court, which still believes that the matrimonial bond between the two has not ruptured beyond repair or that the two cannot still give a new lease of life to their relation. Frankly, no matter how much we would have liked this to happen but in reality, this is a possibility, which under the facts and circumstances of the case, can only be called wishful."
The Court also said that Whatever may be the justification for the two living separately, with so much of time gone by, any marital love or affection, which may have been between the parties, seems to have dried up. This is a classic case of irretrievable breakdown of marriage.
The bench exercised its power under section 142 of the Constitution of India and dissolved the marriage it being a case f irrrivable breakdown of marriage.
Case Details:-
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5454/ 2023
RAJIB KUMAR ROY
Versus
SUSHMITA SAHA
Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy