Divorce under Hindu Marriage Act allowed if order to restore conjugal rights not obeyed for a year: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court recently reiterated that divorce can be granted in cases where a judicial order for the restitution of conjugal rights is not complied with for a year or more. .A Bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan referred to the provisions of Section 13(1)A)(ii) of the Hindu Marriage Act in this regard."Under Section 13(1A)(ii), it is provided that a divorce petition can be presented on the ground that there has been no restitution of conjugal rights between the parties to the marriage for a period of one year and more after passing the decree for restitution of conjugal rights," the Court observed..The Bench made the observation while allowing a divorce plea by a man who claimed that his wife had deserted him around 2008 and had also refused to comply with a 2013 family court order for the restitution of conjugal rights."This is a case of a complete breakdown of marriage for last 16 years and more," the top court noted..The Court was dealing with an appeal filed by the man (appellant) against the Punjab and Haryana High Court's decision to set aside a divorce decree.By way of background, the appellant's marriage was solemnised in March 1999. After some marital discord in 2006, he filed a plea in 2008 for the restitution of conjugal rights, which was allowed by a family court in May 2013.At the time, his estranged wife was directed to comply with this directive to resume living with her husband within three months.However, she refused to do so. This led the husband to file a divorce petition, which was eventually allowed by a family court. In 2019, the High Court set aside the divorce decree, prompting the man to approach the Supreme Court for relief. The Supreme Court initially referred the matter to mediation, but the parties failed to reach any amicable understanding.By a July 8 order, the top court proceeded to allow the man's plea for a divorce. "The desertion of the appellant (husband) at least from 2008 till the date of filing the divorce petition in 2013 continued without any reasonable cause. Therefore, a decree for divorce on the ground of desertion under Section 13(1)(ib) ought to have been passed. Thus, in our view, the High Court ought to have confirmed the decree of divorce on the ground of desertion," the Supreme Court reasoned. The Court also took on record the man's offer to pay his estranged wife a sum of ₹30 lakhs as a one-time alimony. The Court, therefore, directed the Registry to draw up a decree of divorce as soon as proof of this payment is filed. .Senior Advocate Sukumar Pattjoshi appeared for the appellant. Advocate Shri Sharma appeared for the respondent (wife)..[Read Judgment]