Sapna Negi vs Chaman Singh

2024 INSC 822 NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) NO.2814 of 2023

SAPNA NEGI …PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

CHAMAN SINGH AND ANOTHER …RESPONDENT(S)

JUDGMENT

Aravind Kumar, J.

1. The Petitioner-wife is seeking for transfer of the proceedings in

HMA No.428 of 2023 titled “Sh. Chaman Singh Vs. Smt. Sapna Negi and

another” pending before the court of the Principal Judge, Family Courts,

Roorkee, Uttarakhand to the Family Court, Patiala House Courts, New

Delhi.

2. We have heard the arguments of Shri Gaurav Prakash Pathak

appearing for petitioner and Shri Nagarkatti Kartik Uday appearing for

respondents. The marriage between the petitioner and respondent came to

Signature Not Verified be solemnised on 12.05.2013 and a daughter, Ms. xxx was born on Digitally signed by SWETA BALODI Date: 2024.10.25 13:29:21 IST Reason: 18.05.2016.

1

3. The respondent-husband filed a petition under Section 13(1)(i-a) of

the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for grant of decree of divorce alleging that

petitioner had breached the trust and she was already in relationship with the

second respondent and despite advice given to her to return to the

matrimonial home, she has continued to neglect the family and had failed to

discharge her marital obligations. It is also alleged that petitioner-wife

having secured a job as a teacher in July, 2022, had completely neglected

Respondent-husband. Whereas petitioner-wife contended that on account of

the first respondent-husband having neglected the petitioner and her

daughter and having failed to take care of them, she was left with no other

option but to return to her parental home and she has been residing there

from 2019.

4. This Court in order to explore the possibility of the parties arriving

at a settlement had referred the matter to the Supreme Court Mediation

Centre and report dated 24.07.2024 received from the mediation centre

would disclose that mediation had failed. It is pertinent to note at this

juncture itself, this Court on 28.08.2024 has recorded that relationship

between the petitioner and the first respondent had irretrievably broken

down. It is in this background, the matter came to be referred to mediation,

which did not fructify into settlement and parties present before the Court

have also fairly admitted that the marriage has irretrievably broken down.

2

5. In the factual scenario explained herein above we are of the

considered view that the exercise of the power under Article 142(1) of the

Constitution of India is warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case

and also to do complete justice between the parties particularly in the

background of this Court having noted herein above that marriage between

the petitioner and the first respondent has completely failed and the parties

had not cohabitated from 2019 till date and there being no possibility that the

parties will cohabitate in future. Hence, continuation of the legal relationship

would be unjustified and would not subserve the interest of the parties. Under

similar circumstances, this Court in Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan1,

has held that this Court can depart from the procedure as well as the

substantive laws, as long as the decision is exercised based on considerations

of fundamental, general and specific public policy. It is also held that in

exercise of power under Article 142(1) of the Constitution of India, this

Court has the discretion to dissolve the marriage on the ground of its

irretrievable breakdown, and this discretionary power is to be exercised to

do ‘complete justice’ to the parties, when this Court is satisfied that the facts

established show that the marriage has completely failed and there is no

possibility that the parties will cohabit together, and continuation of the

formal legal relationship is unjustified.

1 2023 SCC OnLine SC 544

3

6. Hence, we are of the view that continuation of the proceedings before

the Trial Court could only be an ordeal which both the parties will have to

undergo and we are of the considered view that marriage between the

petitioner and respondent having irretrievably broken down, exercise of

power by this Court under Article 142 of Constitution of India is called for

in the facts and circumstances obtained and also keeping in mind that

petitioner and first respondent are quite young namely 32 years and 38 years

respectively and have future ahead of them. It is also undisputed that

daughter Ms. xxx born out of this wedlock is aged about 8 years and has been

residing with the petitioner-wife from the year 2019. There was a settlement

agreement entered into between the parties on 22.03.2023 whereunder it is

agreed that the daughter would be residing with the petitioner and will be

taken care of by the petitioner herself. Under the said agreement, a sum of

Rs 7,00,000/- has been deposited in the name of minor daughter Ms. xxx in

a fixed deposit with UCO Bank, Sabhawala Branch by the first respondent-

husband which is not disputed by the petitioner, though the said settlement

is seriously disputed by the petitioner on the ground that she is not a

signatory. Having regard to the fact that petitioner is also gainfully employed

in a Government school and earning a reasonable income and keeping in

mind the financial capability of the first respondent-husband to take care of

the interest of the daughter, we are of the considered view that ends of the

justice would meet if the first respondent is directed to pay a permanent 4 alimony of Rs.13,00,000/- in addition to the amount of Rs. 7,00,000/-

already deposited in a fixed deposit, as it would take care of the financial

interest of the minor daughter. Thus, by securing the interest of the minor

daughter of the petitioner and first respondent, the petition HMA No.428 of

2023 titled “Sh. Chaman Singh Vs. Smt. Sapna Negi and another” pending

before the court of the Principal Judge, Family Courts, Roorkee, Uttarakhand

can be disposed of by granting a decree of divorce of the marriage that was

solemnised between petitioner and first respondent on 12.05.2013 by

allowing the said petition. Hence, the marriage solemnised on 12.05.2013

between the petitioner and first respondent-husband stands dissolved by

granting a decree of divorce in exercise of the power vested under Article

142(1) of the Constitution of India. Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stand consigned to records.

……………………………….J. (B.R. Gavai)

.………………………………J. (Aravind Kumar)

.………………………………J. (K.V. Viswanathan) New Delhi October 24, 2024

5