Case Analysis: Prakashchandra Joshi Vs Kuntal Prakashchandra Joshi

Citation	2024 SCC Online SC68
Date of Judgement	January 24,2024
Court	Supreme Court of India
Appellant	Prakashchandra Joshi
Respondent	Kuntal Prakashchandra Joshi
Bench	B.R. Gavai & Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ.

INTRODUCTION

The case of Prakashchandra Joshi vs. Kuntal Prakashchandra Joshi is a recent decision of The Supreme court of India on 24 January 2024 highlighted the power of article 142(1) of the Indian Constitution which provides the unique power of the Supreme Court of India to do ‘complete justice’ between the parties, where at times the law or any statute may not provide any remedy or when such power is exercised, the question or the lack of subject-matter jurisdiction does not arise. Here the respondent is Mrs. Kuntal Prakashchandra against her the case of divorce is being filed by his husband Mr. Prakashchandra Joshi (appellant) on the grounds of cruelty and desertion. Both the family Court of district court and the High Court of Maharashtra dismissed the petition of the appellant observing all other things and stated that no case had been made from the alleged cruelty caused to the appellant by the respondent. But the Supreme Court of India dissolves the marriage between the parties on the ground of irretrievable breakdown by exercising its power under Article 142(1) of the Indian Constitution. 

FACTS OF THE CASE

1. The marriage between Mr. and Mrs. Joshi was being solemnized on 5^th of January 2004 according to the rituals of Hindu religion, and they had spent 8 years of courtship before that.
2. They are having citizenship of India as they are Indian by birth but also having the citizenship of Canada for financial gain. They were living a peaceful and happy matrimonial life in Canada, giving birth to a male child on 21.05.2010.
3. Their happy life starts going towards its dawn by the onset of appellant’s medical problems namely, constant back and shoulder pain as well as skin related problems during summers also, this results into sleepless nights and miserable days for them.
4. During the period of recession in Canada Mr. Joshi lost his job and they returned to India on 29^th January 2011.The respondent stayed after staying sometime at her matrimonial home joined her paternal house on 20^th February 2011 along with their son.
5. After asking several times by the appellant for cohabitation the respondent did not pay any heed neither returned to him, she was interested in returning to Canada for a better future but the appellant was expressing his unwillingness to shift to Canada because of his health issues.
6. The respondent left for Canada along with her son. The appellant tried to contact the respondent through various modes requesting her to come back but she did not responded.
7. Then the respondent filed a petition under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights which remained uncontested on respondent’s behalf so he withdrawn restitution of conjugal rights petition and finally filed a divorce petition on ground of cruelty and desertion
8. The respondent did not present in any of the hearing and the petition proceeded ex parte.
9. The family court of district court after observing all the pleading and evidence dismissed the petition stating that no case had been caused by cruelty to the appellant by the respondent.

                Then he moved his appeal in the family court of the High court where his appeal was also dismissed.

ISSUES ARISED

1. Whether a decree for divorce can be granted for the reason that the marriage has irretrievably broken down.

CONTENTIONS OF APPELLANT

1. Mr. Dhananjay Bhaskar Ray, learned council appeared for the appellant for his pleadings.
2. The learned council submitted that the appellant and the respondent have been living apart for last 13 years due to some matrimonial discord and now there is not any chances of reconciliation so ultimately the marriage has Been breakdown. And the unrepresentation of the respondent clearly indicates that she is not willing to live with the appellant.
3. He also argues that the uncontroverted evidences establish the facts that the appellant had been treated with mental cruelty with his wife.

CONTENTIONS OF RESPONDENT

The respondent Mrs. Kuntal Prakashchandra Joshi is being unrepresented during the whole court proceeding either by herself or through her council.

              She wanted to return to Canada for their better future but the appellant shows his unwillingness because of his health issues so she herself went there along with his son.

JUDGEMENT

The Supreme Court ruled over the order impugned dated 24.06.2021 by the High Court at Bombay and the Family court at district court. Both the court dismissed the petition stating that no case had been made for the cruelty caused to the appellant by the respondent. But the supreme Court after taking the reference of cases as Sukhendu das v. Rita Mukherjee and Samar Ghosh v. Jaya Ghosh an also using its Jurisdiction under Article 142(1) of the Indian Constitution dissolves the marriage between the parties on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage

               The Supreme Court mentioned in its judgement that the marriage is dissolved on the ground of irretrievable breakdown and the parties were residing separately for almost 13 years and they have had no contact with each other since then. The respondent is not even responding to the summons issued by the courts it clearly states that she is no longer interested in continuing her marital relationship with the appellant. So, there is no hesitation in holding that this is the case of irretrievable breakdown of marriage and there is not any possibility of the couple living together.

ANALYSIS

The case of Prakashchandra Joshi vs Kuntal Prakashchandra Joshi highlights the power of Supreme Court of Article 142(1) under which the SC is permitted to do complete justice where at times the law or statute may not provide a remedy or even no questions arise on its subject matter. 

CONCLUSION

The conclusion of the case Prakashchandra Joshi vs. Prakashchandra Joshi is that the appellant filed divorce petition on the ground of cruelty and desertion and both the family court of lower and the high court dismissed the appeal stating that it is not proved that respondent caused cruelty to the appellant but the Supreme Court using its Jurisdiction in Article 142(1) of the Indian Constitution dissolved the marriage on the ground of irreversible breakdown of marriage as the parties were residing separately for 13 years with having no contact at all or neither they were interested in residing together.

REFERENCE

    SCCONLINE

Written by Shreya Raj an intern under legal vidhiya.

Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or the materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is of a personal nature.