The Kerala High Court has held that a Family Court cannot refuse a petition for divorce by mutual consent solely on the ground that the duration of the marriage was short, observing that such an approach intrudes upon the personal autonomy of the parties.
Justice C.S. Dias, allowing an appeal against a Family Court order, observed:
"The legislature, in its wisdom, has provided a mechanism for divorce by mutual consent precisely to allow parties who have irreconcilably decided to end their marriage to do so with dignity and without adversarial litigation. The Family Court's paternalistic inquiry into the 'adequacy' of the marriage's duration has no basis in law."
The court held that once both parties have freely and independently consented to the divorce, the role of the court is limited to verifying the sincerity of the consent and ensuring there is no coercion — not to second-guess the parties' decision.
The divorce decree was granted accordingly.
Justice C.S. Dias, allowing an appeal against a Family Court order, observed:
"The legislature, in its wisdom, has provided a mechanism for divorce by mutual consent precisely to allow parties who have irreconcilably decided to end their marriage to do so with dignity and without adversarial litigation. The Family Court's paternalistic inquiry into the 'adequacy' of the marriage's duration has no basis in law."
The court held that once both parties have freely and independently consented to the divorce, the role of the court is limited to verifying the sincerity of the consent and ensuring there is no coercion — not to second-guess the parties' decision.
The divorce decree was granted accordingly.