‘One works at night, one at day’, SC allows dissolution of techie couple’s marriage

New Delhi: The Supreme Court urged a techie couple to give a second chance to their marriage, but subsequently allowed its dissolution.

A bench of Justices K.M. Joseph and B.V. Nagarathna noted that both husband and wife are software engineers posted in Bengaluru and one goes to duty in the day and the other in the night. During the hearing, the bench had asked the couple to think about giving a second chance to marriage instead of taking a divorce and also noted that Bengaluru is not a place where divorces take place so frequently.

Counsel of the parties submitted that during the pendency of this petition the parties were referred to the Supreme Court Mediation Centre in order to explore the possibility of a settlement between them.

“They submit that the parties have agreed to a settlement which is crystallised in the form of the Settlement Agreement dated 23.02.2023 which has been filed before this court. They further submit that the parties have decided to dissolve their marriage by a decree of divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on certain terms and conditions,” noted the bench, in its order.

The bench was informed that one of the terms was that the respondent-husband would pay a total sum of Rs 12,51,000 towards full and final settlement of all monetary claims of the petitioner vis-a-vis the respondent-husband as permanent alimony.

“They further brought to our notice that there are four proceedings pending as of now between the parties and that the petition for divorce may be disposed of in terms of the settlement arrived between the parties and three other cases as noted in the paragraph (N) of the Settlement Agreement may be quashed,” noted the bench.

The bench said: “In the circumstances, we have taken on record the Settlement Agreement as well as the application filed under Article 142 of the Constitution. We have perused the same. On perusal, we find that the terms of the Settlement Agreements are lawful and there is no legal impediment for accepting the terms of settlement. We also record that the respondent-husband paid a total sum of Rs 12,51,000 to the petitioner-wife who has acknowledged the receipt of the demand drafts.”

The bench said, “In the circumstances, we exercise our power under Article 142 of the Constitution and dissolve the marriage between the parties by a decree of divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The terms of the settlement or the Settlement Agreement shall be read as part and parcel of this order.”

–IANS