HC: Can't make spouse wait endlessly for remarriage

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, February 23

In a significant judgment liable to change the way an estranged partner ties the knot after legalising the parting of ways, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that a spouse cannot be made to wait for an endless period following the court’s failure to decide the appeal within the stipulated time.

The observation

Advertisement

A spouse cannot be held guilty of contempt for his/her obligation not to perform marriage, when the appellate court itself fails to perform its own obligation of deciding the appeal within the stipulated time.

The ruling by Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan came on a contempt petition alleging performance of second marriage by the respondent-wife during the pendency of an appeal filed by the petitioner-husband against the judgment and decree granting divorce to her. The Bench was assisted in the matter by advocates Pushpinder Kaushal and Sarju Puri.

Justice Sangwan asserted that Section 21B(3) of the Hindu Marriage Act stated that an appeal would be disposed of expeditiously, within three months. It did cast a duty and obligation on the appellate court to decide the appeal in a time-bound manner as Section 15 prohibited the spouse, in whose favour the decree of divorce was passed, from remarrying.

Justice Sangwan asserted there could not be an endless time limit for the spouse not to remarry. Referring to the facts of the case, Justice Sangwan observed the notices were issued in November 2008 and the appeal was admitted the same month. It had not been decided till date despite a lapse of more than a decade, though a duty was cast upon the appellate court to dispose of the matter in three months.

Distinguishing the matter from the ones dealt by the courts in previous judgments, Justice Sangwan asserted in all matters there was no reference to 21B(3) on expeditious disposal.

Justice Sangwan asserted that apparently a spouse could not be held guilty of contempt for his/her obligation not to perform marriage, when the appellate court itself failed to perform its own obligation. The respondent, on the face of it, performed marriage about 10 years after the decree of divorce was passed by the trial court and could not be held guilty of civil contempt for the High Court’s inability to dispose of the appeal in terms of Section 21B of the Act.

“Though there is no dispute that the violation of Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act amounts to civil contempt under Section 2(b) of the Act. However, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case when there is no specific restraint order from remarrying after the three months period expired under Section 21B(3) for disposal of the appeal, considering that the respondent waited for 10 years and ultimately decided to move on to secure her future and performed the second marriage, no wilful disobedience is made out,” Justice Sangwan added.