Pranav B Prem

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has held that permanent alimony and interim maintenance under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA) can be granted even when a marriage has been declared void. The three-judge bench comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, and Augustine George Masih pronounced this verdict in response to a reference made by a two-judge bench led by Justice Vikram Nath due to conflicting judicial precedents on this issue.

Key Observations by the Supreme Court

The Court ruled: “A spouse whose marriage has been declared void under Section 11 of the 1955 Act is entitled to seek permanent alimony or maintenance from the other spouse by invoking Section 25 of the 1955 Act. Whether such a relief of permanent alimony can be granted or not always depends on the facts of each case and the conduct of the parties. The grant of relief under Section 25 is always discretionary.”

Regarding the grant of interim maintenance under Section 24 of HMA, the Court observed: “Even if a court comes to a prima facie conclusion that the marriage between the parties is void or voidable, pending the final disposal of the proceeding under the 1955 Act, the court is not precluded from granting maintenance pendente lite provided the conditions mentioned in Section 24 are satisfied. While deciding the prayer for interim relief under Section 24, the Court will always take into consideration the conduct of the party seeking the relief, as the grant of relief under Section 24 is always discretionary.”

Conflicting Precedents and Legislative Intent

The reference to the larger bench was necessitated by divergent judicial opinions. The bench examined past Supreme Court rulings, some of which supported the grant of alimony in void marriages, including Chand Dhawan v. Jawaharlal Dhawan (1993) 3 SCC 406 and Rameshchandra Rampratapji Daga v. Rameshwari Rameshchandra Daga (2005) 2 SCC 33. However, other cases, such as Yamunabai Anantrao Adhav v. Anantrao Shivram Adhav (1988) 1 SCC 530 and Savitaben Somabhai Bhatiya v. State of Gujarat (2005) 3 SCC 636, denied such relief, holding that a spouse from a void marriage cannot claim maintenance.

Rejecting the argument of the appellant-husband, the judgment stated: “While enacting Section 25(1), the legislature has made no distinction between a decree of divorce and a decree declaring marriage as a nullity. Therefore, on a plain reading of Section 25(1), it will not be possible to exclude a decree of nullity under Section 11 from the purview of Section 25(1) of the 1955 Act.” The Court clarified that Section 25 of HMA provides discretionary powers to the family court to grant permanent alimony upon passing of “any decree” under the Act, which includes decrees declaring a marriage void.

The Appellant's Arguments & The Court’s Rebuttal

The appellant-husband contended that the term “any decree” under Section 25 should not include decrees declaring a marriage void. He argued that a void marriage is legally non-existent, so no spouse can claim benefits under Section 25. The Court, however, firmly rejected this view, emphasizing that: “The decree referred to in Section 25 of the 1955 Act is the decree as contemplated by Section 23, which has the title ‘decree in proceedings’. On plain reading thereof, the decree contemplated by Section 23 is a decree granting relief under the 1955 Act.” The Court also dismissed concerns that such an interpretation would lead to absurd situations, stating that equitable considerations apply when granting relief under Section 25, and the court has discretion to deny relief based on the conduct of the parties.

With this ruling, the Supreme Court has settled the legal ambiguity surrounding the issue of alimony and maintenance in void marriages under the Hindu Marriage Act. By affirming that maintenance can be awarded even in cases where the marriage is declared null and void, the Court has ensured financial protection for vulnerable spouses, particularly women, who might otherwise be left destitute due to technical invalidation of their marriage.

Cause Title: Sukhdev Singh V. Sukhbir Kaur  

Case No: Civil Appeal No.2536 OF 2019

Bench: Justice Abhay S. Oka, Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Justice Augustine George Masih

[Read/Download order]