Romesh Chander v Savitri
Rule established
Where a marriage has irretrievably broken down and there is no possibility of the parties coming together, the Supreme Court may exercise its power under Article 142 to dissolve the marriage even in the absence of a proved statutory ground, as forcing parties to remain tied in a dead marriage serves no social purpose.
Facts
- The husband and wife had been engaged in prolonged litigation, with cross-cases of cruelty and misconduct. They had been living apart for years. Each accused the other of cruelty but evidence was contested. The marriage had clearly broken down beyond repair, with both parties unable to cohabit and engaged in hostile legal proceedings.
Issue
- Whether the Supreme Court can dissolve a marriage under Article 142 on the ground of irretrievable breakdown, even though irretrievable breakdown is not a statutory ground under the Hindu Marriage Act.
Held
- The Supreme Court has the power under Article 142 to pass any order necessary to do complete justice. Where a marriage is evidently dead, with no prospect of reconciliation, keeping the parties legally bound in a non-functional marriage serves no purpose. The Court dissolved the marriage, reiterating the recommendation that irretrievable breakdown should be legislatively recognised as a ground for divorce.
Ratio Decidendi
Article 142 empowers the Supreme Court to dissolve a marriage on the ground of irretrievable breakdown even in the absence of a specific statutory ground. This power is exercised where the marriage is effectively dead, the parties have been in prolonged hostile litigation, and reconciliation is impossible.
How to use it in an exam
- Part of the "irretrievable breakdown" case law chain: Jordan Diengdeh (1985) → Romesh Chander (1995) → Naveen Kohli (2006) → Amardeep Singh (2017)
- Important caveat: Only the SC can exercise Article 142 powers; High Courts and family courts cannot dissolve marriage on irretrievable breakdown alone
- Relevant for essay questions on divorce law reform
Source
Source: (1995) 2 SCC 7; cross-verify citation before exam use
This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.