Advocates Cannot Threaten Judges With Corruption Allegations To Force Favourable Orders: Bombay High Court Holds Lawyers Guilty Of Criminal Contempt Co-Sharer Cannot Transfer Specific Portion Of Joint Land; Sale Operates Only As Transfer Of Undivided Share: Himachal Pradesh High Court Companies Act 2013 | Amount Due For Refund Post-Capital Reduction Does Not Qualify As Unclaimed Application Money For IEPF Transfer: Delhi High Court Seniority Cannot Be Claimed By Ad Hoc Or Temporary Employees Over Regularly Appointed Candidates: Supreme Court Supreme Court Directs Deposit Of Entire Enhanced Compensation In Land Acquisition Appeals To Balance Financial Liability And Landowners' Rights Succession To Bhumidhari Rights By Hindu Women Governed By Personal Law As It Stands On Date Of Demise: Supreme Court Hindu Widow’s Limited Life Interest In Agricultural Land Becomes Absolute Upon Enactment Of HSA 1956, Governs Devolution Under Delhi Land Reforms Act: Supreme Court Bodily Injury Under Section 165 MV Act Covers Both Temporary And Permanent Injuries Irrespective Of Disability Certification: Bombay High Court Testimony Of An Injured Witness Is A 'Sterling Witness' With A Built-In Guarantee Of Presence At The Scene Of Crime: Allahabad High Court Scrutiny Committee Has Inherent Power To Direct Re-Examination Of Documents During Caste Verification, Does Not Need To Discard Entire Vigilance Report: Bombay High Court Tender Cancellation Orders Must Be Reasoned; Affidavit Cannot Supplement Missing Reasons: Allahabad High Court Section 9 Of Arbitration Act Allows Interim Orders Against Non-Signatories To Preserve Subject Matter: Delhi High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Parsi Matrimonial Suit Can Be Dismissed At Threshold If Jurisdictional Fact Of Marriage Solemnisation In India Is Absent: Bombay High Court Section 125 CrPC | Maintenance Is A Social Welfare Measure To Prevent Destitution, Not A Tool For Financial Enrichment: Allahabad High Court Locus Standi To Challenge Tenancy Orders | Person With Registered Agreement For Sale Is An 'Aggrieved Person' Under BTAL Act: Bombay High Court State Legislature Lacks Competence To Levy Cess On Agricultural Produce Brought For Manufacturing Without Sale: Uttarakhand High Court Senior Citizens Act | Maintenance Order Attains Finality And Remains Executable Against Legal Heirs Post-Death Of Respondent: Telangana High Court Civil Court Cannot Grant Injunction Against SARFAESI Proceedings Even If Suit Property Title Is Disputed: Madhya Pradesh High Court Co-Accused Confession Without Recovery Hit By Section 23 BSA: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail In Robbery Case Section 28 Hindu Marriage Act | Appellate Court Can Set Aside Divorce Decree Upon Post-Decree Reconciliation Between Parties: Rajasthan High Court Failure To Collect Electronic Evidence Such As Call Detail Records In Offences Under Section 354 IPC Can Prove Fatal To Prosecution Case: Telangana High Court Mere Pendency Of Challenge To Sale Certificate Before DRT Does Not Bar Mutation Under OSS Rules: Orissa High Court Court May Impose Conditions On Minor’s Custody In Habeas Corpus Proceedings To Protect Best Interest Of Child: Madhya Pradesh High Court Banking Fraud | Failure Of Bank Official To Conduct Physical Inspection Of Collateral Property Constitutes Criminal Conspiracy And Abuse Of Official Position: Madras High Court Order 7 Rule 11 CPC | Plaint Cannot Be Rejected For Lack Of Specific Particulars Or Res Judicata At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Surprise Check Without Prior FIR Registration Casts Doubt On Foundational Facts; Uncorroborated Approver Evidence Tainted: Madras High Court Acquits Former Protector Of Emigrants Appointment Of Lambardar | Appellate Authority Remanding Matter Must Not Pre-Judge Merits Of Candidates: Punjab & Haryana High Court Disciplinary Proceedings | Subsequent Deposit Of Embezzled Amount Does Not Exonerate Employee Or Efface Misconduct: Rajasthan High Court Order XXI Rule 37 CPC | Willful Evasion Of Decretal Debt Despite Having Means Justifies Arrest And Detention: Telangana High Court Claims For Recovery Of Stridhan Must Be Substantiated By Cogent Evidence, Not Merely Oral Assertion: Kerala High Court Concurrent Findings Of Fact Regarding Unproved Oral Family Settlement Cannot Be Re-Appreciated In Second Appeal: Punjab And Haryana High Court Limitation Act | Governmental Bureaucratic Delays Without Acceptable Explanation Cannot Be A Ground For Condoning Delay Under Section 5: Telangana High Court

Section 28 Hindu Marriage Act | Appellate Court Can Set Aside Divorce Decree Upon Post-Decree Reconciliation Between Parties: Rajasthan High Court

10 October 2026 1:29 PM

By: sayum


"Where two persons, after traversing the difficult path of discord, voluntarily choose to walk together once again, the law should, wherever permissible, facilitate that journey towards peace and restoration." Rajasthan High Court, in a significant ruling, held that an appellate court is empowered to set aside a decree of divorce if the parties, post-decree, have voluntarily reconciled and expressed a mutual desire to restore their matrimonial relationship.

A division bench of Justice Uma Shanker Vyas and Justice Sameer Jain observed that matrimonial litigation should not be treated as a mere adversarial contest, but as a human process where the law must facilitate reconciliation to protect familial sanctity and the welfare of children.

The appellant and respondent were married on 23 October 2015. Following matrimonial discord, the Family Court at Hanumangarh dissolved their marriage vide decree dated 30 November 2024, acting upon a petition filed by the respondent-husband under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The wife subsequently challenged this dissolution before the High Court.

The primary question before the court was whether an appellate court, while seized of an appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, possesses the jurisdiction to set aside a divorce decree based on a reconciliation achieved between the parties subsequent to the impugned order. The court was further tasked with determining whether the welfare of a minor child constitutes a compelling ground for the restoration of a dissolved marriage.

Court Emphasizes Reconciliation Over Litigation

The court underscored that marriage is not merely a contract but a sacred sanskara. The bench noted that while life may be fraught with discord, the legal system should not stand as an impediment when parties choose to heal their past wounds. Quoting the epic narratives of Nala and Damayanti, the court highlighted that temporary separation need not result in a permanent end if hearts seek reunion.

"The essence of matrimonial adjudication is not merely to determine the existence of a legal wrong, but, wherever circumstances permit, to facilitate a just and humane resolution of the dispute."

Welfare of the Minor Child as a Paramount Consideration

The bench laid significant stress on the impact of divorce on the couple's minor daughter. The court observed that the parents’ voluntary decision to reconcile was driven by a commitment to provide the child with emotional security and the combined care of both parents. The court held that the welfare of the child is best served when parental conflict is replaced by mutual respect and familial stability.

"The Court is further of the considered view that the paramount consideration in the peculiar facts of the present case is the welfare of the minor girl."

Exercise of Appellate Jurisdiction Post-Settlement

The court reasoned that because the dispute was essentially private and lacked larger public consequence, there was no legal bar to giving effect to the parties' changed circumstances. Relying on the precedent set in Kamlesh Devi v. Vijay Kumar Soni, the bench concluded that failing to acknowledge the reconciliation would be contrary to the interests of justice, as the underlying cause of the litigation had effectively ceased to exist.

"Where the parties themselves have found a path from discord to reconciliation, the law should, wherever permissible, facilitate peace rather than perpetuate conflict."

Restoration of Marriage

Consequently, the High Court set aside the judgment and decree dated 30 November 2024. The court declared that the marriage solemnized on 23 October 2015 stands restored as if the divorce decree had never been passed. The Registrar (Judicial) was directed to communicate this order to the Family Court to update its records, thereby finalizing the restoration of the marital status of the parties.

Date of Decision: 15 September 2026

 

Latest Legal News