Skip to main content

Irretrievable breakdown of marriage

 Irretrievable Breakdown of marriage

Shreya Verma

Matrimonial matters are the matters of delicate human and emotional relationship. It demands mutual trust, regard, respect, love and affection with sufficiently for reasonable adjustment of the spouse. The relationship has to conform to the social norms as well. The matrimonial conduct has now come to be governed by statute framed, keeping in view such norms and changed social order. It is sought to be controlled in the interest of individuals as well as in broad perspective, for regulating matrimonial norms for making of a well-knit, healthy and not a disturbed and porous society this was the view of the Supreme court in the case of, Chetan Das v. Kamla Devi (2001).

In this case it was submitted that irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not in itself ground for divorce, though it may well be a factor to be borne in mind when a case is decided.

One of the grounds for getting a degree for annulment of marriage on the reasons of irretrievable big breakdown is that the party who is seeking for the dissolution of marriage must do equity as in the case of Chetan Das, The party seeking to divorce was found in the court of judicial proceeding to have committed a matrimonial offense that is adultery a decree of divorce on the grounds of retrievable breakdown of marriage was not granted on the basis that the airing party cannot be permitted to break a marital bond by taking advantage of his own wrong. ‘Irretrievable breakdown of marriage' is not a ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act and Special Marriages Act, the Supreme Court has, in a significant ruling, said divorce can be granted if a marriage is totally unworkable, emotionally dead and beyond salvage. The supreme court in Naveen Kohli vs. Neetu Kohli (2006) Made an observation that mutual consent and irretrievable breakdown should not to be read together. The good also in this case requested the union ministry to introduce irretrievable breakdown as the ground for divorce. In the case of Anil Kumar Jain vs. Maya Jain (2009) The Supreme Court held that the doctrine of irretrievable breakdown was not available to high court which do not have powers similar to those exercised by the Supreme Court under article 124. 

The fault theory of divorce requires that there was a specific ground or a fault on the part of one of the parties to marriage which would form a ground for divorce. But in case of irretrievable breakdown of marriage, there is no specific ground rather there are multiple grounds that enable the parties not to live together anymore. In Amandeep vs Harleen Kaur (2017) SC, the division bench of the Apex court, headed by Adarsh Kumar Goel J. Supreme Court its power to grant divorce on the basis of irretrievable breakdown of marriage from Article 124 to the Constitution however the high court and trial court can also grant divorce for irretrievable breakdown under the provisions of section 13B that too only if irretrievable breakdown as proved.

The Supreme Court holds an opinion that the institution of marriage occupies an important place and role to play in society, in general. Therefore, it would not be appropriate to apply any submission of ‘irretrievably broken marriage’ as a straitjacket formula for grant of relief of divorce. This aspect has to be considered in the background of other facts and circumstances of the case.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more