Sarvesh Kumar Sharma vs Sarvesh Kumari Sharma

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.10130 of 2025)

SHRI SARVESH KUMAR SHARMA APPELLANT

VERSUS

SMT. SARVESH KUMARI SHARMA RESPONDENT

O R D E R

Heard Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, learned counsel for the

appellant.

2. Leave granted.

3. The present appeal is directed against the impugned order

dated 03.09.2024 passed by the High Court of Judicature at

Allahabad in First Appeal No.715 of 2004, by which the High

Court while affirming the order dated 28.04.2004 passed by the

Additional District Judge/Special Judge, Budaun, Uttar Pradesh

in Matrimonial case No.208 of 1995, has dismissed the appeal

filed by the appellant-husband seeking dissolution of marriage Signature Not Verified

by a decree of divorce.

Digitally signed by SAPNA BISHT Date: 2025.09.15 17:31:46 IST Reason:

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the

marriage between the parties took place in the year 1980 and 2

intermittently, for various periods, the respondent-wife came

to the matrimonial home but thereafter, from the year 1995,

she has not been to the matrimonial home i.e., the couple have

not lived together even for a single day from then till date.

It was submitted that the Additional District Judge/Special

Judge, Budaun, Uttar Pradesh had refused to grant divorce

because of the fact that cruelty or desertion on the part of

the respondent was not proved. Learned counsel submitted that

the High Court has also upheld the order of the Additional

District Judge/Special Judge, Budaun, Uttar Pradesh only on a

premise that cruelty was not proved since the respondent-wife

had withdrawn the criminal cases. However, it was submitted

that today, the parties are in a position where the

respondent-wife had chosen not to appear before the High Court

and even before this Court, she has not appeared.

5. Having considered the matter from various angles, we are

of the considered opinion that the orders of the Courts below

need interference. It is true that facts speak for themselves.

In the present case, at least, it is not in dispute that since

1995 i.e., almost for the last 30 years, the parties are not

living together. It is also true that the respondent-wife has

not appeared before the High Court and even before this Court.

In this regard, the order passed by this Court on 22.07.2025

which speaks for itself, is reproduced hereinunder:- 3

“Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that although notice has been served, the respondent- wife has not entered appearance.

2. However, having regard to the nature of the relief sought, we deem it appropriate that the respondent-

wife be given an opportunity to appear before this Court before we take a final view in the matter.

3. Accordingly, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner is permitted to serve dasti notice on the respondent-wife, enclosing a copy of this order, requesting the respondent-wife to make necessary arrangements to appear before this Court.

4. It is clarified that in the event the respondent- wife expresses her inability to appear due to financial and/or other constraints, she shall be informed that she is entitled to avail legal aid services through the concerned District Legal Services Authority, which shall co-ordinate with the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee for providing a counsel to represent her before this Court.

5. List on 09.09.2025.”

6. Today, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that

despite their endeavour to serve the respondent through dasti

mode, she refused to accept such notice.

7. In the aforesaid background and taking note of the fact

that respondent has withdrawn the criminal cases and no fresh

case has been filed by her, is also an indication that she has

no interest in pursuing the matter.

8. Under the aforesaid circumstances, when the respondent-

wife after having resisted the challenge before the Trial

Court, has thereafter, not chosen to contest is a sufficient

proof that she is not interested in pursuing the issue of 4

divorce which leads to the next presumption that she is no

more interested for restoration of relationship also. Pausing

here, we would indicate that in our previous order dated

22.07.2025, we had also given indication to the respondent

that she would be entitled to avail legal aid services through

the concerned District Legal Services Authority, which shall

co-ordinate with the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee

for providing a counsel to represent her before this Court

which has not been availed of.

9. Under the circumstances for giving a quietus to the

present issue, we find that a case has been made out for

invocation of our power under Article 142 of the Constitution

of India for grant of decree of divorce on the ground of

irretrievable breakdown of marriage. Accordingly, a decree of

divorce is granted to the appellant-husband on the ground of

irretrievable breakdown of marriage. Registry is directed to

draw up a decree of divorce accordingly.

10. Before parting, we would indicate that if the respondent-

wife feels that she is in need of some financial support by

way of permanent alimony or otherwise, it will be open for her

to approach this Court for the same. However, the same has to

be done latest, within a period of six months from today. We

once again reiterate that even for such proceedings, the

respondent would be entitled for assistance from the Legal 5

Services Committee of this Court. For the said purpose, the

District Legal Services Committee of the Civil Court, Badaun,

Uttar Pradesh shall coordinate with the Legal Services

Committee of this Court for her appearance before this Court.

11. Registry is directed to communicate this order to the

respondent forthwith.

12. The appeal stands allowed in the aforementioned terms.

13. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

……………………………………………………………………J. [AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH]

…………………………………………………………………………J. [K. VINOD CHANDRAN]

NEW DELHI 09th SEPTEMBER, 2025 6

ITEM NO.39 COURT NO.12 SECTION XI

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).10130/2025

[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 03-09-2024 in FA No.715/2004 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad]

SARVESH KUMAR SHARMA Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

SARVESH KUMARI SHARMA Respondent(s)

Date : 09-09-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. VINOD CHANDRAN

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, AOR Ms. Aayushi, Adv.

For Respondent(s)

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

Leave granted.

2. The appeal stands allowed in terms of the signed order.

3. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

(SAPNA BISHT) (ANJALI PANWAR) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH) (Signed order is placed on the file)