In a significant ruling that clarifies the legal weight of divorce settlements, the Gujarat High Court has held that terms and conditions agreed upon during a mutual consent divorce are fully enforceable and must be executed by a family court. The judgment came after a family court in Ahmedabad earlier refused to direct a divorced woman to relinquish her rights in a joint property as per their agreement.
The Case Background: A 2008 Marriage and a 2019 Divorce
The couple at the center of this legal dispute got married in Ahmedabad in the year 2008. They were blessed with a daughter in 2015. However, their marriage eventually broke down, and they obtained a divorce decree from the family court in 2019 based on mutual consent.
Their joint petition, filed under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, contained several agreed terms for a peaceful separation. Key among these conditions were:
- Custody of their daughter would remain with the mother.
- The wife would relinquish her ownership rights in a jointly owned flat located in Vastrapur, Ahmedabad.
- She would cooperate in getting the necessary release deed registered with the sub-registrar's office.
The Dispute and Family Court's Refusal
In 2021, the ex-husband approached his former wife, requesting her to fulfill her part of the bargain and give up her property rights as promised in their divorce petition. The woman, however, delayed the process and proposed that the property rights be transferred to their daughter instead.
Following this, the man moved the family court seeking execution of the settlement terms to have his ex-wife's name removed from the official property records. In 2023, the family court declined to grant him this relief. It held that the divorce decree did not contain a specific direction for the execution of a document. The court suggested that the man could file a separate civil suit seeking specific performance of the agreement under the Specific Relief Act.
High Court's Decisive Ruling and Legal Reasoning
The husband then challenged the family court's order before the Gujarat High Court. A division bench comprising Justice Sangeeta Vishen and Justice Nisha Thakore quashed the family court's order. The bench delivered a clear and firm verdict.
The High Court ruled that once the terms of a settlement are incorporated into a consent divorce decree, they become an integral part of the decree itself. Therefore, they must be enforced through execution proceedings in the family court. The court questioned whether the ex-wife could even challenge the decree she had willingly accepted.
The bench strongly stated that the family court, for the purpose of executing the decree, cannot redirect a party to file a separate lawsuit for issues already agreed upon and adjudicated. It emphasized that allowing such a course would defeat the very purpose of the Family Courts Act, 1984, and the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
The court highlighted that the central theme of both these laws is to reduce litigation and provide an early resolution to family disputes. Forcing parties into fresh civil suits over settled matters would only prolong conflict and increase legal burdens.
Implications of the Judgment
This judgment sets an important precedent for divorce cases settled by mutual consent across Gujarat and potentially beyond. It reinforces the sanctity of agreements made during such settlements and empowers family courts to ensure they are honored. The ruling sends a clear message that parties cannot backtrack on their agreed terms after enjoying the benefits of a consent decree. It also streamlines the legal process, ensuring that family courts use their execution powers to enforce their own decrees, thereby upholding the promise of speedy justice that underpins family law legislation.
