Lack Of Title Documents In Lal Dora Land Does Not Relieve Plaintiff From Proving Continuous Possession To Claim Ownership: Delhi High Court Unauthorized Video Recording Of Court Proceedings Without Prior Permission Amounts To Contempt Of Court: Bombay High Court Finality Of Litigation | State Cannot Re-Litigate Settled Decrees By Alleging Collusion After Affirmation Up To Supreme Court: Allahabad High Court SC/ST Act | Court Cannot Determine Conversion Status To Quash FIR Before Completion Of Investigation: Andhra Pradesh High Court Absence Of Manufacturing Activity And Dilapidated Condition Of Premises Constitute Valid Grounds For Closure: Bombay High Court Non-Disclosure Of Existing Insurance Policies In Proposal Form Entitles Insurer To Repudiate Claim: Calcutta High Court Will Interpretation | Bequest Of "Above Said Property" Includes Entire Estate, Not Just Descriptive Portions Mentioned Therein: Delhi High Court Limitation Act | Court Can Balance Equities By Denying Interest For Delay Period In Land Acquisition Appeals: Gujarat High Court Article 21 Constitution Of India | Personal Liberty Of Detenue Cannot Be Curtailed Without Authority Of Law Post-Acquittal: Jharkhand High Court Order 8 Rule 1A CPC | Trial Court Should Not Reject Documents Merely For Delay If Foundation Is Laid In Pleadings: Andhra Pradesh High Court Order XXII CPC Applies To SCC Suits; Rule 25 Of U.P. Urban Buildings Rules Does Not Govern Substitution Where Act Is Inapplicable: Allahabad High Court Recruitment Authorities Cannot Insist On Impossible Experience Criteria: Karnataka High Court Rules Against Rejection Of Motor Vehicle Inspector Candidates Order 38 Rule 8 CPC | Claim Petition Cannot Be Allowed Ex-Parte Without Adjudication On Merits: Kerala High Court Succession Certificate Under Section 372 Indian Succession Act Cannot Be Granted When Title Is Subject To Intricate Questions Of Fact And Law: Madras High Court SARFAESI Act | District Magistrate Cannot Adjudicate Disputes Between Borrower And Secured Creditor While Assisting Possession: Madhya Pradesh High Court Termination Based On Caste Status Without Cancellation Of Original Certificate Is Legally Unsustainable: Orissa High Court Section 13 Punjab Village Common Lands Act | Civil Court Jurisdiction Not Ousted In Private Injunction Suits Where Title Against Panchayat Is Not Sought: High Court Rights Of Persons With Disabilities Act  | Equal Opportunity Policy Of Employer Is Mandatory; Routine Transfer Policy Must Yield To Special Provisions For Caregivers: Rajasthan High Court Compensation Must Be Just, Not A Pittance: Punjab & Haryana High Court Enhances Award In Motor Accident Claim Registration Act | Sub-Registrar Has No Power To Adjudicate Title Or Refuse Registration Based On Unauthorized Layouts: Telangana High Court Section 50 NDPS Act | Failure To Individually Communicate Right To Be Searched Before Gazetted Officer Or Magistrate Vitiates Conviction: Telangana High Court

Marriage Totally Unworkable, Emotionally Dead and Beyond Salvation – Supreme Court Grants Divorce Under Article 142

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court today dissolved the marriage of Jatinder Kumar Sapra and Anupama Sapra, which had been under strife for over two decades, citing irretrievable breakdown as the ground for dissolution.

Legal Context: The apex court utilized its discretion under Article 142(1) of the Constitution of India to grant the divorce despite the specific grounds under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 not being fully substantiated with evidence. This discretionary power is exercised to ensure “complete justice” when conventional remedies are inadequate.

Facts of the Case: Jatinder Kumar Sapra and Anupama Sapra, married on October 14, 1991, found their marriage mired in bitterness, mutual accusations of cruelty, and a prolonged separation since January 2002. Both the Family Court and the High Court had previously denied the divorce petition citing insufficient grounds under the existing marital laws.

Irretrievable Breakdown: The Court, led by Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, noted that the marriage was “totally unworkable, emotionally dead, and beyond salvation,” conditions that necessitated a divorce to prevent further legal and emotional turmoil.

Attempts at Reconciliation: The court acknowledged several failed attempts at mediation and reconciliation over the years, affirming that no further efforts could salvage the marital relationship.

Economic and Social Considerations: The justices considered the stable financial status of the appellant, who had a significant career in multinational corporations, and the adulthood and independence of their children, which lessened familial dependencies.

Permanent Alimony: An alimony of Rs. 50,00,000 was set, reflecting the appellant’s financial capacity and aiming to secure the respondent’s future.

Decision: The court decreed the dissolution of marriage based on its findings of an irretrievable breakdown, directing the appellant to pay alimony in five installments from May to September 2024. The divorce decree will be issued once the full alimony payment is confirmed.

Date of Decision: May 6, 2024

Jatinder Kumar Sapra vs. Anupama Sapra

Latest Legal News