Kerala High Court Upholds Mutual Consent Divorce, Dismisses Appeal Against Withdrawal of Consent
Appellant's Attempt to Retract from Mutual Divorce Consent Dismissed; Court Emphasizes Fulfillment of Obligations under Settlement Agreement
In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by Bindu, the appellant, who sought to withdraw her consent from a mutual divorce petition under Section 10A of the Divorce Act, 1869. The division bench, comprising Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice M.B. Snehalatha, held that a party cannot retract from a mutual consent divorce agreement while simultaneously enjoying the benefits accrued from it, especially in the absence of evidence suggesting deceit or coercion.
The case originated from matrimonial disputes between the parties dating back to 2011, leading to multiple legal proceedings, including claims for maintenance and the return of gold and patrimony. A compromise was reached between the parties, which was documented as a Settlement Memorandum and approved by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Irinjalakuda.
Despite accepting the benefits as per the settlement, including financial deposits by the respondent, Benny, the appellant refused to vacate the matrimonial home, a condition she had agreed to. The Family Court, after assessing the matter, granted the divorce, noting that Bindu's attempt to withdraw consent was not permissible as she had already accepted benefits under the agreement.
The appellant's counsel, Shri P.M. Abdul Jaleel, argued that the consent was obtained through deceit, but the court found no evidence supporting this claim. The court highlighted that Bindu had voluntarily withdrawn the amounts deposited by Benny, undermining her argument of deception.
The respondent's counsel, Sri T.N. Manoj, contended that Bindu's actions were an abuse of the legal process, as she sought to enjoy the benefits without fulfilling her obligations. The High Court, agreeing with this view, emphasized that obligations under a mutual consent agreement must be honored once benefits are accepted.
The court's decision underscores the principle that mutual consent divorce agreements cannot be unilaterally rescinded without just cause, ensuring fairness and adherence to agreed terms. The appeal was dismissed, but no order on costs was made, considering the peculiar circumstances of the case.
Bottom Line:
A party to a mutual consent divorce petition cannot retract their obligations under the agreement while enjoying the benefits accrued under it, especially when there is no evidence to suggest deceit or coercion in signing the agreement.
Statutory provision(s): Divorce Act, 1869, Section 10A
