The Supreme Court brought down the curtain on what it called a "matrimonial battle of Mahabharata", dissolving a decade-long marriage that had spawned over 80 cases across multiple forums, ordering the husband, a practising lawyer, to pay Rs.5 crore in permanent alimony, and quashing all pending litigation against the wife, her relatives, and her legal counsel in one sweeping exercise of its extraordinary constitutional powers under Article 142.
For ten years, a couple that had long ceased to function as a family continued to wage an exhaustive legal war, not just against each other, but against an ever-widening circle that included relatives and the wife's own advocates. The husband, armed with legal training, had filed nine separate cases against the lawyers representing his wife across various forums, a strategy the Court identified as deliberate intimidation rather than legitimate litigation. When the question of alimony arose, he cited his recent resignation from a company's directorship as proof of financial incapacity. The wife's legal team countered that this exit was a calculated move to evade monetary obligations, while the husband maintained that his wife's professional qualifications and overseas employment absolved him of any financial responsibility toward her and their child.
A bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta dismantled the husband's defences one by one. On his weaponisation of legal process, the Court found that he had been "exploiting his knowledge as a law professional to frustrate the proceedings and to intimidate the advocates appearing for the appellant-wife." On his claimed financial ruin, the Court was equally unsparing, holding that his assertion of incapacity was "nothing but a subterfuge to evade his legal and moral obligations."
On the wife's qualifications being used to nullify his parental duty, the Court rejected that logic outright, ruling that the cost of raising and educating a child in today's economic reality cannot be offloaded entirely onto a mother simply because she holds professional credentials. The Court directed the husband to pay Rs.5 crore as full and final settlement, ordered the wife to vacate a flat belonging to the husband's father, and bound both parties through undertakings, the wife confirming peaceful vacation of the premises, and the husband committing to file no further proceedings against the wife, her family, or her lawyers.
All 80 plus pending cases were simultaneously quashed.
Case Title: XXX Vs. YYY
Case No.: SLP (CIVIL) NO(S). 28311 OF 2024
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vikram Nath, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Mehta
Advocate for the Petitioner: Sr. Adv. Amit Rawal, Adv. Aman Vachher, Adv. Sujit Lahoti, Adv. Abhiti Vachher, Adv. Akshat Vachher, Adv. Tejasvi Kudtarkar, Adv. Jasvinder Choudhary, Adv. Rishika, AOR Vachher And Agrud
Advocate for the Respondent: Respondent-in-person
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :