Bar Council of India Notice

Disclaimer & Confirmation

As per the rules of the Bar Council of India, an advocate is not permitted to solicit work or advertise. By clicking “I Agree” below, you acknowledge and confirm that:

you are seeking information about Advocate Manish Jha of your own accord and for your own information and use; there has been no advertisement, personal communication, solicitation, invitation or inducement of any kind whatsoever from Advocate Manish Jha or the chamber to solicit any work through this website; the information made available here is provided only on your specific request; and no information on this website is to be construed as legal advice, nor does its use create any advocate-client relationship.

⚖  E-397, 4th Floor, Tagore Garden Extension, New Delhi – 110027 Mon–Sat  ·  +91 98738 50301  ·  legal@advocatemanishjha.com
Advocate Manish Jha Criminal · Civil · Family Law — New Delhi ☎  Consult the Chamber
Home › Divorce Appeal — Breakdown
Telangana High Court · 15 September 2026

Thirty-Four Years, One Wrong Ground: Divorce Decree Set Aside Because Breakdown Is Not in the Statute

In Ashuma Dewan v. Wg. Cdr. (Retd.) Ramesh Kumar, a Division Bench allowed the wife's appeal and set aside a decree of divorce, holding that the Family Court could not dissolve a marriage on irretrievable breakdown — a power reserved to the Supreme Court — when cruelty and desertion were not proved.

Irretrievable breakdown of marriage is a phrase heard in almost every contested divorce, but it is not a ground on which a Family Court can pass a decree. That is the crux of Ashuma Dewan v. Wg. Cdr. (Retd.) Ramesh Kumar, Family Court Appeal No. 480 of 2018, decided on 15 September 2026 by a Division Bench of the Telangana High Court comprising Justice K. Lakshman and Justice B.R. Madhusudhan Rao. The Bench allowed the wife's appeal and set aside the decree of divorce that the Family Court had granted to the husband after a marriage of some thirty-four years, because the statutory grounds of cruelty and desertion under Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act had not been proved — and breakdown alone could not fill the gap.

The dispute

The husband, a retired Air Force officer, petitioned for divorce on cruelty and desertion. The wife's case was the mirror image: that the harassment began within months of the marriage, that she had suffered serious violence — including an incident in 2007 and injuries in 2008 — and that it was this conduct which forced her to leave and to initiate proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. A deed of separation existed between the parties, and an array of criminal and civil cases travelled with the matrimonial dispute. The Family Court granted the husband a decree. The wife appealed.

What the Division Bench held

The Bench allowed the appeal and set aside the decree, for three connected reasons.

Cruelty not proved. The husband failed to establish the acts of cruelty alleged against the wife on the evidence.
Desertion not made out. The wife's departure traced to the husband's own conduct; a petitioner cannot exploit his own wrong to characterise the resulting separation as desertion.
Wrong ground applied. The Family Court had rested the decree, in substance, on irretrievable breakdown — a ground that appears nowhere in Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act and that only the Supreme Court can act upon under Article 142.

The Bench also noted the parties' ages — the wife about seventy and the husband seventy-nine — and the wife's steadfast opposition to losing her marital status after three and a half decades. Dissolution on a ground unknown to the statute would have stripped her of that status without legal foundation.

Breakdown: doctrine and its limits

The Supreme Court has, in a line of decisions, dissolved marriages that were dead in all but name by invoking Article 142 — a jurisdiction to do complete justice that belongs to that Court alone. The Law Commission has more than once recommended adding breakdown as a statutory ground, and Parliament has not done so. The consequence, which this judgment enforces, is a clean division of labour: trial and appellate matrimonial courts decide on the enacted grounds — cruelty, desertion, adultery, conversion, and the rest — and the fact that a marriage has practically collapsed may colour the appreciation of evidence but cannot substitute for proof of a ground. A decree that rests on breakdown alone is a decree without jurisdictional footing, and it will not survive appeal.

What this means for litigants

For petitioners, the message is sobering but practical. However complete the estrangement, the petition must be built to prove a statutory ground: particularised incidents of cruelty with dates and witnesses, or the elements of desertion including the respondent's intention to abandon. A petitioner who instead invites the court to acknowledge that the marriage is over invites reversal. For respondents defending against a weak petition, the case supplies a two-step template — demonstrate that the pleaded ground fails on the evidence, and then show that whatever remains of the reasoning is breakdown by another name. For elderly litigants in particular, courts remain conscious that marital status carries social and financial consequences — pensions, succession, residence — that a court should not disturb except strictly according to law.

The position in Delhi

Matrimonial appeals before the High Court of Delhi proceed on the same principle: the appellate court tests the decree against the statutory grounds and the evidence, not against the temperature of the relationship. Where spouses genuinely both wish to end a long-dead marriage, the lawful routes remain mutual consent under Section 13B — or, in exceptional cases, a joint approach to the Supreme Court. What no Family Court in Delhi or elsewhere can do is decree a contested divorce because the marriage looks beyond repair.

This article is for general information only and is not legal advice or a solicitation.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can any court in India grant divorce on irretrievable breakdown of marriage?

Only the Supreme Court, exercising its extraordinary power under Article 142 of the Constitution to do complete justice, has dissolved marriages on the ground of irretrievable breakdown. Family Courts and High Courts must decide divorce petitions on the grounds enacted in the applicable statute, such as Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

Does a long separation automatically prove desertion?

No. Desertion requires both the fact of separation and the intention to abandon the marriage, without reasonable cause and without the petitioner's consent. Where the petitioner's own conduct drove the other spouse from the home, the separation cannot be counted as desertion by that spouse, however long it lasts.

What weight do pending criminal and civil cases between spouses carry?

Cross-litigation is part of the matrimonial record, but each proceeding is decided on its own evidence. The existence of complaints, including proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act, does not by itself prove or disprove cruelty in the divorce case; the matrimonial court examines the underlying conduct.

What happens after a divorce decree is set aside in appeal?

The parties remain married in law. Either spouse may pursue other remedies — maintenance, residence, or, on fresh and proved facts, a future petition on statutory grounds. An appellate reversal restores the status quo ante; it does not compel cohabitation.

Note: This article is general information about the law and is not legal advice. It does not create an advocate-client relationship. The position stated is as at 18 September 2026 and may have changed since. Readers should verify any provision or decision referred to against the official text and seek advice on their own circumstances.