Supreme Court annuls marriage using Article 142 in settlement: Kirti Vijayvargiya vs. Rahul Vijayvargiya (28 February 2020)

Introduction

Date of the Judgment: 28 February 2020

Citation: Not Available

Judges: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Uday Umesh Lalit and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vineet Saran

Can the Supreme Court use its extraordinary powers to dissolve a marriage when both parties agree and have settled their disputes? This question was addressed in a recent case where the parties, after facing marital discord, decided to part ways amicably. The Supreme Court, in this instance, exercised its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to annul the marriage, emphasizing the importance of amicable settlements in matrimonial disputes. The judgment was delivered by a bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice Uday Umesh Lalit and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vineet Saran.

Case Background

The case involves a transfer petition filed by Kirti Vijayvargiya (the petitioner-wife) against Rahul Vijayvargiya (the respondent-husband). The parties were in a marital dispute, which led to several legal proceedings, including cases filed under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) and the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 by the petitioner-wife. The couple had married on 28.02.2017 in Surat, Gujarat.

The matter was initially referred to the Supreme Court Mediation Centre to explore the possibility of a settlement between the parties.

Timeline

Course of Proceedings

The matter was initially referred to the Supreme Court Mediation Centre to explore the possibility of settlement between the parties.

Legal Framework

The Supreme Court exercised its power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to annul the marriage. Article 142 empowers the Supreme Court to pass any decree or order necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it.

The Court noted that the parties had agreed to withdraw all cases filed against each other, including those under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

Arguments

The parties, represented by their respective counsel, jointly submitted that they had reached an amicable settlement and wished to part ways. The respondent-husband agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 11,51,000 to the petitioner-wife as a full and final settlement of all her claims, which the petitioner acknowledged receiving.

The parties submitted that they were young and desired to lead their lives independently.

Issues Framed by the Supreme Court

• Whether the Supreme Court can annul the marriage in exercise of its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, given that the parties have settled their disputes amicably?

Treatment of the Issue by the Court

Authorities

The Court did not cite any specific cases or books in this judgment. The primary authority relied upon was Article 142 of the Constitution of India.

Judgment

The Court exercised its power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India and annulled the marriage.

What weighed in the mind of the Court?

The Court was primarily influenced by the fact that the parties had reached an amicable settlement and were desirous of leading their lives independently. The settlement included the withdrawal of all cases and a financial agreement. The Court emphasized the importance of allowing individuals to move on with their lives when they have mutually decided to end their marital relationship.

The Court’s decision was based on the mutual consent of the parties and their desire to move on with their lives. The Court found that it was in the best interest of both parties to dissolve the marriage.

The Court stated, “Since the parties have settled their disputes amicably and have decided to part company, we exercise our power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India and annul their marriage…”

The Court further noted, “The respondent-husband also agreed to pay a sum of Rs.11,51,000/- (Rupees eleven lakh fifty one thousand only) to the petitioner-wife towards full and final settlement of all her claims.”

The Court also stated, “The petitioner and the respondent are quite young and are desirous to lead their lives independently.”

Key Takeaways

• The Supreme Court can exercise its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to annul a marriage when the parties have settled their disputes amicably.
• Amicable settlements are encouraged in matrimonial disputes.
• The Court prioritizes the parties’ desire to lead independent lives when they mutually agree to end their marital relationship.

Directions

The Supreme Court directed that a copy of the order be placed on record of Divorce Case No. 38 of 2018 pending before the Family Court, Chitorgarh, Rajasthan, and that the said divorce case shall stand disposed of in terms of this order.

Development of Law

The judgment reinforces the Supreme Court’s power under Article 142 of the Constitution to ensure complete justice. It highlights the Court’s willingness to facilitate amicable settlements in matrimonial disputes and to allow parties to move on with their lives when they mutually agree to end their marriage. The ratio decidendi is that in cases of amicable settlement, the Supreme Court can exercise its power under Article 142 to annul a marriage.

Conclusion

In the case of Kirti Vijayvargiya vs. Rahul Vijayvargiya, the Supreme Court annulled the marriage by exercising its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. This decision was based on the fact that the parties had reached an amicable settlement, agreed to withdraw all pending cases, and desired to lead independent lives. The Court’s intervention underscores its commitment to facilitating amicable resolutions in matrimonial disputes and ensuring complete justice.