The Supreme Court examined whether a court exercising appellate jurisdiction can grant a decree of divorce on a ground not expressly enumerated in the statute. The matter required interpretation of Section 13 HMA and consideration of the constitutional limits on judicial law-making.

The Court analysed whether irretrievable breakdown, though recognised in certain judicial pronouncements, could operate as an independent ground for divorce in the absence of legislative incorporation. The judgment reaffirmed the principle of separation of powers and clarified that courts cannot expand statutory grounds through judicial innovation.

Important Extracts from the Judgment:

High Court Findings (Paras 13 & 17):

“On a reading of the entire evidence, it is not possible to conclude that the appellant has been able to establish that the respondent treated him with cruelty.”

“To grant divorce to the appellant despite this only on the ground of irretrievable breakdown would not, in the view of this Court, be doing justice to the respondent.”

On Findings of Fact:

“We are not inclined to interfere with the finding of fact of both the courts below that it was the appellant who treated the respondent with cruelty, rather than the other way around.”

On Irretrievable Breakdown Not Being a Statutory Ground:

“On a bare reading of Section 13 of the Act, reproduced above, it is crystal clear that no such ground of irretrievable breakdown of the marriage is provided by the legislature for granting a decree of divorce. This Court cannot add such a ground to Section 13 of the Act as that would be amending the Act, which is a function of the legislature.”

“If we grant divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown, then we shall by judicial verdict be adding a clause to Section 13 of the Act to the effect that irretrievable breakdown of the marriage is also a ground for divorce.”

“In our opinion, this can only be done by the legislature and not by the Court.”

On Mutual Consent:

“Had both parties been willing we could, of course, have granted a divorce by mutual consent as contemplated by Section 13B of the Act, but in this case the respondent is not willing to agree to a divorce.”

Decision

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal.

The Court held that:

• The appellant failed to establish cruelty.

• Irretrievable breakdown is not a statutory ground under Section 13 HMA.

• The judiciary cannot legislate by adding new grounds for divorce.

• Only Parliament can amend the statute to include such a ground.

Citation :

Other Sources :

Index of Divorce Judgements is here.

Key Contributor : 

Mrs. Suprajaa Rajan B.Com., LL.B., LL.M.

+91-9606345150