Section 23 HMA: Decree in proceedings

Section 23 of Hindu Marriage Act: Decree in proceedings

Official Bare Act Text

Override / Mandate Mens Rea (Intent) Actus Reus (Conduct) Punishment Limitation Monetary

In any proceeding under this Act, whether defended or not, if the court is satisfied that-

any of the grounds for granting relief exists and the petitioner except in cases where the relief is sought by him on the ground specified in sub clause (a), sub-clause (b) or sub-clause ( c ) of clause (ii) of section 5

is not in any way taking advantage of his or her own wrong or disability for the purpose of such relief, and

where the ground of the petition is the ground specified in clause (i) of sub-section (1) of section 13, the petitioner has not in any manner been accessory to or connived at or condoned the act or acts complained of, or where the ground of the petition is cruelty the petitioner has not in any manner condoned the cruelty, and

(bb) when a divorce is sought on the ground of mutual consent, such consent has not been obtained by force, fraud or undue influence, and

the petition (not being a petition presented under section 11

) is not presented or prosecuted in collusion with the respondent, and

there has not been any unnecessary or improper delay in instituting the proceeding, and

there is no other legal ground why relief should not be granted, then, and in such a case, but not otherwise, the court shall decree such relief accordingly.

Before proceeding to grant any relief under this Act, it shall be the duty of the court in the first instance, in every case where it is possible so to do consistently with the nature and circumstances of the case, to make every endeavour to bring about a reconciliation between the parties:

Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall apply to any proceeding wherein relief is sought on any of the grounds specified in clause (ii), clause (iii), clause (iv), clause (v), clause (vi) or clause (vii) of sub-section (1) of section 13.

For the purpose of aiding the court in bringing about such reconciliation, the court may, if the parties so desire or if the court thinks it just and proper so to do, adjourn the proceedings for a reasonable period not exceeding fifteen days and refer the matter to any person named by the parties in this behalf or to any person nominated by the court if the parties fail to name any person, with directions to report to the court as to whether reconciliation can be and has been, effected and the court shall in disposing of the proceeding have due regard to the report.

In every case where a marriage is dissolved by a decree of divorce, the court passing the decree shall give a copy thereof free of cost to each of the parties.

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 23

Section 23 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 defines the statutory duty of the court in passing decrees, codifying essential matrimonial bars and mandatory reconciliation.

Statutory Relief & Application: Section 23 is the fundamental gatekeeper of matrimonial relief.
Judicial Powers & Orders: Under sub-section (2), the court is under a mandatory statutory duty in the first instance to make every endeavor to bring about a reconciliation between the parties, and under sub-section (3), may refer the matter to an agreed person or counselor.

This statutory framework establishes clear operational guidelines, balancing legal compliance with procedural safeguards.

Key Landmark Precedents:

Chetan Dass v. Kamla Devi (2001) 4 SCC 250: The Supreme Court held that under Section 23(1)(a), a spouse who is himself at fault—by cohabiting adulterously with another woman and deserting his wife—cannot be allowed to take advantage of his own wrong and demand a decree of divorce on the ground that the marriage has broken down.
Hirachand Srinivas Managaonkar v. Sunanda (2001) 4 SCC 125: The Supreme Court ruled that where a husband fails to pay maintenance awarded in a judicial separation decree, his persistent defiance constitutes a 'wrong' under Section 23(1)(a), disallowing him from obtaining a divorce under Section 13(1A).
Jagraj Singh v. Birpal Kaur (2007) 2 SCC 564: The Court affirmed that the duty of the matrimonial court to endeavor for reconciliation under Section 23(2) is mandatory and forms the foundational ethos of Indian family law.

Legal Commentary:

Section 23 operates as an overriding check on all matrimonial decrees. Even in uncontested ex-parte proceedings, the court cannot mechanically grant relief; it must independently scrutinize whether condonation, unexplained delay, collusion, or the petitioner's own wrongful conduct bars the petition. Furthermore, the reconciliation mandate under Section 23(2) is actively enforced through in-person Family Court mediation sessions.

Section 23: Decree in proceedings

Section 23 of Hindu Marriage Act: Decree in proceedings

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 23