Meeting reasonable expenses of daughter’s marriage, a natural extension of man's duty: SC

The Supreme Court has on September 12, 2025 said, it is a father’s duty to provide for his children, and meeting the marriage expenses of his daughter is a modest obligation.

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta confirmed the Delhi High Court's order, which affirmed a decree of divorce granted by the family court to the couple which got married in 1996.

The court, however, allowed the woman's limited plea for a direction to the man to provide Rs 10 lakh towards the marriage expenses of their daughter, born in 1997, finding it reasonable.

"We are of the considered view that the respondent can and should contribute Rs 10,00,000 (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) for this purpose as meeting the reasonable expenses of his daughter’s marriage is a natural extension of his duty as a parent, irrespective of differences with the spouse,'' the bench said.

After going through the facts of the matter, the court noted, it was evident that the marital relationship between the parties has ceased to exist in substance. Even an attempt at mediation before us proved unsuccessful.

"Since the appeals are pressed only to the limited extent of payment of a certain amount, and in view of the long separation and irretrievable breakdown of the marriage, we find no reason to interfere with the decree of divorce granted by the Family Court and affirmed by the High Court,'' the bench said.

The court also found that the litigation between the parties has been prolonged and acrimonious. Yet, the appellant-wife has been reasonable in limiting her claim.

The woman filed the appeals against the judgment and order of December 18, 2023 passed by the Delhi High Court, affirming the decree of divorce granted by the Family Court on September 20, 2019.

As per the facts of the matter, the parties were married on May 6, 1996 and have two children from the marriage: a daughter born in 1997 and a son born in 1999.

In March 2009, the respondent-husband filed a divorce petition, alleging various instances of mental cruelty by the wife, whereas the wife contended that she herself had been subjected to mental and physical cruelty.

On a complaint under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 by the woman against the husband and his family members, the Mahila Court directed the husband to pay maintenance of Rs 6,300 per month, later enhanced to Rs 7,500 per month.

In 2013, the respondent-husband moved an application in the DV Act proceedings seeking DNA testing of both children, claiming they were not his. Eventually, the main complaint under the DV Act was dismissed.

On appeal, the appellate Court, by an order on July 31, 2019, held the respondent-husband guilty of domestic violence and directed him to pay Rs 2,00,000 to the appellant-wife. This was enhanced to Rs 7,00,000 by the High Court on November 9, 2022 in a revision filed by the appellant wife. The special leave petition filed by the respondent-husband challenging the said order was dismissed by the Supreme Court on March 27, 2023.

Meanwhile, the Family Court granted divorce on the ground of cruelty. The appellant-wife challenged it before the High Court which dismissed it by the impugned order.

The High Court noted the parties had been in constant acrimony since the inception of their marriage, leading the wife to make repeated complaints to the police. The High Court held that lodging false complaints amounted to cruelty. It also noted that the parties have lived separately since around 2009, with no attempt at reconciliation.

Before the apex court, the appellant-wife confined her claim to seeking an amount of Rs 10,00,000 towards the marriage expenses of their daughter. She claimed the husband earned from running an aquarium shop, rental income from his properties, and contributions from his father. The respondent denied these claims and stated that he has no earnings whatsoever.

"As regards the issue of contribution for the daughter’s marriage, the parties have taken conflicting stands on the respondent’s income. Nevertheless, on our consideration of the record and submissions, we are satisfied that the respondent is capable of making provision for his daughter’s marriage,'' the bench said.

The court finally directed the respondent-husband to pay an amount of Rs 10,00,000 to the appellant-wife towards on or before October 15, 2025. In case of default, the Registry would revive these appeals for further consideration and appropriate orders, it said.

The bench confirmed the decree of divorce subject to the direction of payment of Rs 10,00,000.

Case Title: Geeta @ Reeta Mishra Vs Ajay Kumar Mishra

Bench: Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta

Date of Judgment: September 12, 2025