Do you have a legal query?
Supreme Court invokes Article 142 to grant divorce by mutual consent despite desertion findings and orders lump-sum permanent alimony. Read the latest Supreme Court judgment on divorce.
Published by BLJ Legal | Divorce & Family Law | December 18, 2025
In a significant ruling reaffirming the extraordinary constitutional powers of the Supreme Court to do complete justice, the Supreme Court of India in Bhagyashree Bisi v. Animesh Padhee (2025 INSC 1464) dissolved a marriage by mutual consent under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, despite concurrent findings of desertion by the Family Court and the High Court.
The judgment underscores that where a marriage has irretrievably broken down, and both parties unequivocally consent to separation, the Supreme Court may step in to bring finality to matrimonial disputes, override technical grounds, and ensure equitable settlement—including permanent alimony. The ruling has important implications for divorce litigation, desertion claims, and matrimonial disputes pending before courts across India, including Delhi NCR.
The appellant-wife and respondent-husband were married on 14 December 2014 at Sambalpur, Odisha.
The appellant was employed with Infosys and had professional assignments in the United States of America.
Differences arose after cohabitation in Bangalore.
The husband filed a petition for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, alleging desertion since January 2020.
The wife denied desertion, claiming she left due to a hostile matrimonial environment and professional obligations.
The Family Court, Sambalpur, granted divorce on the ground of desertion.
The High Court of Orissa affirmed the decree.
The wife approached the Supreme Court challenging the finding of desertion.
Whether the decree of divorce on the ground of desertion should be sustained.
Whether the Supreme Court can dissolve marriage by mutual consent under Article 142, notwithstanding earlier findings.
Determination of permanent alimony in cases where both spouses are working professionals.
Closure of pending matrimonial litigations upon settlement.
Section 13, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Grounds for divorce
Article 142, Constitution of India – Power of Supreme Court to do complete justice
Family Courts Act, 1984
The Supreme Court, after hearing both parties, made the following crucial observations:
The Court noted that the parties had been living separately for a considerable period and that efforts at reconciliation had failed. Both spouses had clearly expressed their desire to end the marriage, leaving no scope for restoration of the matrimonial bond.
Although the Family Court and High Court had granted divorce on the ground of desertion, both parties agreed before the Supreme Court that the marriage may instead be dissolved by mutual consent. The Court held that in such circumstances, Article 142 can be invoked to dissolve the marriage in order to do complete justice, rather than continuing litigation on contested grounds.
The Supreme Court set aside the decree of divorce based on desertion and substituted it with a decree of divorce by mutual consent, recognising that continuation of adversarial findings would serve no meaningful purpose.
Considering that both parties were working professionals and financially independent, the Court deemed it appropriate to award lump-sum permanent alimony. A sum of ₹25 lakhs was fixed as full and final settlement, payable within two months, to bring closure to all matrimonial claims.
The Court directed that upon payment of the settled amount:
A decree of divorce shall be drawn,
All pending civil and criminal proceedings between the parties arising from the matrimonial dispute shall stand closed.
The Supreme Court disposed of the appeal by:
Setting aside the decree of divorce on the ground of desertion,
Dissolving the marriage by mutual consent under Article 142,
Awarding ₹25 lakhs as one-time permanent alimony, and
Directing closure of all pending litigations between the parties.
Even where divorce is granted on contested grounds, the Supreme Court can dissolve marriage by mutual consent to ensure finality.
Prolonged separation strengthens the case for irretrievable breakdown of marriage.
Article 142 remains a powerful tool in matrimonial litigation before the Supreme Court.
Consent-based resolution can override adversarial findings where continuation serves no purpose.
Reinforces the principle that substantive justice prevails over technical grounds in matrimonial matters.
Encourages holistic settlement including alimony and closure of proceedings.
Yes. The Supreme Court can exercise its powers under Article 142 to dissolve marriage by mutual consent without procedural constraints, where justice so demands.
Yes. As held in this case, the Supreme Court may set aside the ground of desertion and grant divorce by mutual consent if both parties agree.
Not statutorily, but the Supreme Court routinely recognises it while exercising powers under Article 142.
The Court considers income, employment status, financial capacity, and overall circumstances of both parties.
Yes. The principles apply nationwide and are frequently relied upon in matrimonial disputes originating from Delhi and NCR courts.
In Bhagyashree Bisi v. Animesh Padhee (2025 INSC 1464), the Supreme Court has once again demonstrated its commitment to substantive justice in matrimonial matters by invoking Article 142 to dissolve a marriage by mutual consent, notwithstanding earlier findings of desertion. The judgment highlights that where a marriage has irretrievably broken down, courts should facilitate dignified closure rather than perpetuate litigation.
Article 142 empowers the Supreme Court to dissolve marriages by mutual consent.
Desertion findings can be set aside where both parties seek amicable separation.
Lump-sum alimony helps bring finality to matrimonial disputes.
Pending litigations may be closed to prevent multiplicity of proceedings.
This ruling will serve as an important precedent for divorce litigation strategy across India, including matters arising before Delhi and NCR courts.
If you are facing matrimonial disputes, divorce proceedings, or issues relating to permanent alimony and settlement, Advocate Shasha Jain at BLJ Legal provides experienced and strategic legal representation before Family Courts, High Courts, and the Supreme Court of India.
📍 Address: Chamber No. 314, Patiala House Courts, Near India Gate, New Delhi – 110001
📞 Phone: 8851632512
📧 Email: legalblj@gmail.com
BLJ Legal – Your trusted partner for resolving matrimonial disputes with dignity and finality.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Readers are advised to consult qualified legal counsel for advice specific to their circumstances.
