NDLI: Hitesh Bhatnagar Vs. Deepa Bhatnagar

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Hindu Marriage Act
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 Referred Case 4 Referred Case 5 Referred Case 6 Referred Case 7 Referred Case 8
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Dismissed
Headnote	Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - s. 138 - Petition for divorce by mutual consent - Withdrawal of consent - Whether the consent Once given can be subsequently withdrawn by one of the parties after the expiry of 18 months from the date of the filing of the petition in accordance with s.138(1); and whether the Court can grant a decree of divorce by mutual consent when the consent has been withdrawn by one of the parties, and If so, under what circumstances - Held: The language employed in s. 138(2) is clear- If the second motion is not made within the period of 18 months, then the Court is not bound to pass a decree of divorce by mutual consent - Besides, from the language of the Section, as well as the settled law, it is clear that one of the parties may withdraw consent at any time before the passing of the decree - The most important requirement for a grant of a divorce by mutual consent is free consent of both the parties - Unless there is a complete agreement between husband and wife for the dissolution of the marriage and unless the Court is completely satisfied, it cannot grant a decree for divorce by mutual consent - Otherwise, the expression 'divorce by mutual consent' would be otiose - In the present fact scenario, the second motion was never made by both the parties as mandatorily required under the law, and no Court can pass a decree of divorce in the absence of that - The eighteen month period is specified only to ensure quick disposal of cases of divorce by mutual consent, and not to specify the time period for withdrawal of consent - Non-withdrawal of consent before expiry of the said eighteen months has no bearing Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 142 ... Power under - Exercise of .. Prayer ·of appellant-husband before Supreme Court that his marriage with respondent-wife had irretrievably broken down and the Court should dissolve the marriage by exercising its jurisdiction under Article 142 - Held: The power under Article 142 is plenipotentiary - However, it is an extraordinary jurisdiction vested by the Constitution with implicit trust and faith and, therefore, extraordinary care and caution has to be observed while exercising this jurisdiction - This Court uses its extraordinary power to dissolve a marriage as having irretrievably broken down only when it is impossible to save the marriage and all efforts made in that regard would, to the mind of the Court, be counterproductive. Even if the chances are infinitesimal for the marriage survive, it is not for this Court to use its power under Article 142 to dissolve the marriage as having broken down irretrievably - In the present case, in light of the facts anti circumstances, it would be travesty of justice to dissolve the marriage as having broken down - Though there is bitterness amongst the parties and they have not even lived as husband and wife for the past about 11 years, it is hoped that they will give this union another chance, if not for themselves, for the future of their daughter.
Judge	Honble Mr. Justice H.L. Dattu
Neutral Citation	2011 INSC 306
Petitioner	Hitesh Bhatnagar
Respondent	Deepa Bhatnagar
SCR	[2011] 6 S.C.R. 118
Judgement Date	2011-04-18
Case Number	6288

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Hitesh Bhatnagar Vs. Deepa Bhatnagar

Please Log-in to view this content

K. Srinivas Rao Vs. D.a. Deepa

S. Hanumantha Rao Vs. S. Ramani

Sharda Vs. Dharmpal

Subramani and Ors. Vs. M. Chandralekha

Smt. Mayadevi Vs. Jagdish Prasad

Deepak Jain Vs. Charu Jain

Rohini Kumari Vs. Narendra Singh

Vikram Vir Vohra Vs. Shalini Bhalla

Savitri Pandey Vs. Prem Chandra Pandey

Hitesh Bhatnagar Vs. Deepa Bhatnagar

Hitesh Bhatnagar Vs. Deepa Bhatnagar

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

K. Srinivas Rao Vs. D.a. Deepa

S. Hanumantha Rao Vs. S. Ramani

Sharda Vs. Dharmpal

Subramani and Ors. Vs. M. Chandralekha

Smt. Mayadevi Vs. Jagdish Prasad

Deepak Jain Vs. Charu Jain

Rohini Kumari Vs. Narendra Singh

Vikram Vir Vohra Vs. Shalini Bhalla

Savitri Pandey Vs. Prem Chandra Pandey

Hitesh Bhatnagar Vs. Deepa Bhatnagar