PANJAB UNIVERSITY

UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES

ASSIGNMENT ON THEORIES OF DIVORCE

Submitted To: Submitted By: 

Dr. Sonal Datta Aastha  

L.L.M. Roll No.: 22110  

UILS Class : LLM (Two Year) UILS ( Sem –II)

Panjab University Session : 2022-2023    

1
 INDEX
S.No. PARTICULARS PAGE

NO.

  1 ABSTRACT 05

2 INTRODUCTION 06

3 THEORIES OF DIVORCE 06 - 19

4 CONCLUSION 20

5 REFERENCES 21

2
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 

Primarily I would like to thank Almighty God for blessing me to complete this
research paper  then I would like to thank my Professor Dr. Sonal Datta under
whose valuable guidance I  am able to complete this project. I would also like to
thank my parents for helping me a lot. I  would also like to thank Adv. Aksshay
Sharma who helped me a lot in completing this project  successfully. At last but
not the least I would also like to thank my classmates and friends for  helping me. 

Aastha 

3
CASE LAWS
1. Dastane v Dastane, AIR 1975 SC 1534.
2. Kaushalya v Wisakhiram AIR 1961 P H 521.
3. Russel v Russel (1924), A.C., 687.
4. Sachindranath Chatterjee v Sm. Nilima Chatterjee, AIR 1970 Cal 38.
5. Swarajya Lakshmi v G. G. Padma Rao  , 1974 AIR 165.

4
 ABSTRACT

Divorce means the dissolution of marriage by a competent court. This paper discusses theories of
divorce under Hindu Law. It analyses how the concept was non-existent under ancient law due to the
sacramental nature of marriage but was introduced under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. It studies
the different theories of divorce- fault, mutual consent, breakdown; and also describes the grounds
for divorce under this Act, with focus on adultery and cruelty, and how these grounds were modified
through amendments. It briefly dwells on the grounds that are only available to a wife. The paper
addresses the pros and cons of the addition of irretrievable breakdown as a ground for divorce amidst
the growing debate about its merits.

5
 1. INTRODUCTION

The Hindu marriage itself was considered from ancient times to be bond of sacramental nature
among husband with wife that stretches until death implying sacred tie that never be called off. Such
sacred knot couldn’t be dissolved once it has been formed. The division of spouses was considered
by Hindus to be an act that breached the law of God.

They therefore did not accept separation, but it laid down provisions concerning divorce after the
enactment of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Matters relating divorce and other connected with it are
addressed in numerous sections. Marriage may be terminated by mutual agreement in an
unauthorized form of marriage, as per Kautilya in Arthashatra.

On the other hand, Manu thought that it was difficult to discontinue marriage as a sacrament and
that faithfulness between the spouse and the wife ought to be conveyed until their final gasps. Under
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, however, the conditions changed after divorce was enforced.

Marriage is both a bond and a sacrifice. It is a contract because it is based on offer and acceptance
and is similar to living together under an arrangement. Because of its religious connection, sentiment.
On tolerance, adaptation and reverence for each other, a sound marriage is established. The
partnership would not be a happy relationship on the off chance that both of companions to the
marriage are not set up to live holding same side.

It will not do any good to stretch such a relationship, but rather grow animosity and resentment
among the spouses. Such a marriage must therefore be dissolved to safeguard the sacredness of
marriage, to decrease the quantity of despondent relationships and to forestall the valuable long
stretches of life of the companions from being wasted.

Divorce means the separation of a marriage under authority of a competent court. Divorce
happens when a person wishes to disrupt an onerous marital arrangement. By undergoing divorce in
court, law allows for a means of getting out of an unhappy marriage. Theories have been identified as
'fault theory' and 'no fault theory' focusing on the type of divorce.

2. THEORIES OF DIVORCE

There are basically three theories for divorce-fault theory, mutual consent theory &irretrievable
breakdown of marriage theory.

6
 Under the Fault theory or the offences theory or the guilt theory, marriage can be dissolved only
when either party to the marriage has committed a matrimonial offence. It is necessary to have a
guilty and an innocent party, and the only innocent party can seek the remedy of divorce. However,
the most striking feature and the drawback is that if both parties have been at fault, there is no
remedy available.

Another theory of divorce is that of mutual consent. The underlying rationale is that since two
persons can marry by their free will, they should also be allowed to move out of the relationship of
their own free will. However, critics of this theory say that this approach will promote immorality as
it will lead to hasty divorces and parties would dissolve their marriage even if there were slight
incompatibility of temperament.

The third theory relates to the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. The breakdown of
marriage is defined as “such failure in the matrimonial relationships or such circumstances adverse to
that relationship that no reasonable probability remains for the spouses again living together as
husband & wife.” Such marriage should be dissolved with maximum fairness & minimum bitterness,
distress & humiliation.

Some of the grounds available under the Hindu Marriage Act can be said to be under the theory of
frustration by reason of specified circumstances. These include civil death, renouncement of the
world etc.

2.1 Fault Theory

One of the partners asks the court to grant divorce focused on certain fault of the other partner in
the fault theory of divorce. 1 It necessitates one guilty along with one innocent party, and cure for
divorce can only be found by an innocent party. The aggrieved party alone is entitled to divorce on
the off chance that one of individual is liable of submitting a conjugal offense. If both parties seek
divorce on the grounds of the other's guilt and both can show that the other spouse is at fault, the
Court determines which one is at least at fault.2It was based on the principle of guilt when the right to
divorce or the right to break the marital bond was first incorporated into marriage law. The other
partner had the right to dissolve the union only if the spouse was guilty of a marriage crime or, in
other words, had breached the terms or conditions of the marriage contract.

1
indianlawportal.co.in.
2
Darshan Gupta v. Radhika Gupta 2013 AIR SCW 5505.
7
 Popular reasons for divorce have been established in almost all the divorce legislation. Under
section 13(1), nine grounds of fault were included in 1955 mentioned Act, on which either spouse
can claim divorce are:

Image Source3

2.1.1 Adultery

In certain nations, the thought of infidelity may not be treated as an offense. Be that as it may, in
the marriage infringement, according to the Hindu Marriage Act, infidelity is viewed as perhaps the
main justification for looking for separation. Adultery implies a common and willful sexual
connection between a wedded individual and someone else of the other gender, either wedded or
unmarried. The intercourse held between the spouse and his subsequent wife, for example the
individual is liable for the Adultery if their marriage is considered under polygamy.

3
Image available at: https://www.google.com/search?
q=theories+of+divorce+under+hindu+law+pdf&rlz=1C1CHBF_enIN1030IN1030&sxsrf=APwXEdfunCBi15FG6_2
NId_SyX6rviKKkA:1684342829595&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjuv6aA6vzAhXsmlYBHa9rB
V8Q_AUoAnoECAEQBA&biw=2304&bih=1118&dpr=0.83#imgrc=ZBCAVPA08UrkOM&imgdii=dfWKGhQnJkf
MjM, visited on May 17,2023.
8
 A scenario describes, with another lady reclined upon bed, the wife found her husband, and the
neighbour also reported that the husband had committed a crime. Here's a wife having a divorce.

Sachindranath Chatterjee vs Sm. Nilima Chatterjee:4

Parties to case were legally married couple. After solominizing , wife was left at her home by
husband. Wife had to complete her studies to find job in another city. He was regularly meeting his
wife in intervals of 2-3 months. He later learned that his wife committed adultery that is, she was
indulged to sexual relations with her nephew and others. Complainant enters the court reflecting
adultery ground to apply for divorce and his claim has been admitted and the marriage is dissolved.

2.1.1.1. Essentials construing Adultery

 Either of partners is engaged for intercourse alongside some other member of the opposite sex,

irrespective of fact that other person is married or not.

 Voluntary as well as consensual sexual intercourse is essential.

 Marriage was in existence at the commission of such act.

 Ample amount of circumstantial proof is required to make another person liable.

2.1.2. Cruelty

Both emotional and physical cruelty are part of the definition of cruelty. Cruelty in physical nature
means that spouse hit another spouse or generates some body harm. But as the partner can also be
psychologically abused by the other spouse, the definition of mental abuse was introduced. Mental
Cruelty is the absence of compassion that adversely affects the individual's welfare. Well, the essence
of physical cruelty is easy to tell, but hard to say about mental cruelty.

2.1.2.1.Things building Mental Cruelty via wife countering Husband:

 To humiliate him when friends including relatives are around.

 Calling off the pregnancy without the permission of the husband.

 To make false accusations against him.

 Not giving consent to martial physical relationship along with no valid reason.

4
AIR 1970 Cal 38.
9
  When wife has an affair.

 When wife lives an immoral life.

 Never ending demand of money.

 If wife behaves aggressively which is uncontrollable.

 Victimization over husband family5

In a case, on grounds of mental cruelty, the petitioner lodged a divorce petition against his wife.
He showed that his wife was violent and uncontrollable in her actions towards him and his parents,
and several times she lodged a false complaint against her husband. On the basis of cruelty, the court
acknowledges the appeal and grants the divorce.6

In Russel v Russel,7 Cruelty is defined as:

Physical Cruelty:
Acts of physical violence on the part of one spouse against the other resulting in injury to the
body, limb or health causing a reasonable apprehension thereof have been traditionally considered
to amount to cruelty.

Though it will differ from case to case that what acts will amount to cruelty, depending upon the
gravity of acts and susceptibility or sensibility of the petitioner.

In Kaushalya v Wisakhiram,8 husband ill-treated the wife, beat her so much that she had to go to
the police station to lodge a complaint against her husband. The court held, this would constitute
to cruelty, even though injuries might not be so serious as to require medical treatment.
 

Mental Cruelty:
Mental Cruelty is the largest and important aspect of cruelty in the modern matrimonial law.
Although intention is no longer an essential ingredient of cruelty but the mental state of the

5
Ibid.
6
II (2003) DMC 708.
7
(1924), A.C., 687.
8
AIR 1961 P H 521.
10
 respondent can't be ignored.

In the landmark case of Dastane v Dastane, 9 Mrs. Dastane used to make all sorts of vile, filthy
and false allegation, not only against the husband but against his whole family. She to abuse him
and his family in the vilest possible terms. She did many sickening pranks on her husband. She
was somewhat mentally unbalanced. But the husband suffered. This was a clear case of mental
cruelty.

2.1.2.2.Reasons that amounts to mental cruelty done by husband with his better half:

 When wrong accusation are put, of adultery.

 Demand for dowry is demanded constantly.

 If husband is impotent.

 Forceful abortion of her child.

 Problem of drinking by husband

 Husband has affair or affairs.

 The husband lives an immoral life.

 If husband behaves aggressively which is uncontrollable.

 Humiliation by husband to wife when around of family and friends.

2.1.3. Desertion

Desertion implies, without any fair explanation and without his permission, the irreversible
abandonment of one partner by the other spouse. In general, it confers dismissal by one spouse
during the commitments of marriage.

2.1.3.1. Essentials

 Other spouse enduring renunciation.

 Declining marriage responsibilities.

 No rationale provided.

9
AIR 1975 SC 1534.
11
  Lacking consent from left spouse.

A matter where respondent goes out in this example fully with the aim of abandoning his wife.
The wife eventually educated court, but the defendant established that when he left the house with
the goal of deserting, he did so with the goal of abandoning his wife, he attempted for returning
where petitioner stopped him from doing so. The defendant should not be held responsible for
desertion in this case.

2.1.4. Conversion

If one of the partners, without the permission of the other partner, changes religion and converts
into other, left spouse may approach court and request a divorce remedy.

Suresh Babu v Leela:10

Here, husband becomes a Muslim for marrying another one. Ex-wife Leela draws case, without
her permission and abuse, sought divorce on the basis of conversion.

2.1.5. Insanity

Insanity means that there is an unsound mind in the person. The following two conditions are
insanity as a reason for divorce—

The respondent was incurably unsound-minded. The respondent has suffered from such a form of
mental illness on an ongoing or irregular basis and so much that the complainant can't decently be
required to live with the respondent.

2.1.6. Leprosy

Leprosy is an infectious disease affecting the skin, mucous membranes, nervous system, and other
organs,so forth irresistible illness. This sickness is passed along through one individual to the next.
As a result, it is regarded as a legal ground for dissolution.

Swarajya Lakshmi v G. G. Padma Rao:11

In matter, on grounds of leprosy, husband filed a case reflecting acceptance of a divorce. He

10
2006 (3) KLT 891.
11
1974 AIR 165.
12
 2.1.7. Disease of Venereal Nature

Pursuing this definition, this constructs as valid ground for initiating divorce if the illness is in
communicable form and it can be transferred to the other partner.

2.1.8. Renunciation

This means that one of the partners if wishes to renounce world to move at God's direction,
remaining partner will enter the court and apply for a divorce. The group who renounces the universe
is regarded as civilly dead in this definition. It is a traditional Hindu tradition and is regarded as a
legitimate basis for divorce.12

.2.1.9. Presumption of Death

In this case, relatives or friends relating to concerned person have heard no news of person being
living or renounced within seven years, the person believed to have died. It is though lawful ground
for separate, yet the weight of confirming lies on the gathering looking for the separation.

In addition to the reasons mentioned above, four additional reasons reflected in s.13(2) of
captioned Act have been given to a wife; they are;

2.1.9.1. Pre-Act polygamous marriage

That husband has another wife, before Act's inception, alive right at petitioner's union
solemnization. The other spouse should in any case be alive at the time the request is submitted.

2.1.9.2. Sodomy, Rape or Bestiality

Spouse has been blameworthy of assault, homosexuality or inhumanity since the solemnization in
marriage.

2.1.9.3. Non-resumption of dwelling together after a declaration/request of Maintenance:

At the point when announcement or request has been granted whether under a suit of area 18 of
Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 or in segment 125 Cr.P.C., there has been no
resumption of living together between the couple for one year or more.

12
Ibid.
13
 2.1.9.4. Repudiation of marriage:

Where marriage took place when wife was minor or not more than 15 years and she called off her
institution with her husband before attaining majority.

2.2. No Fault Theory

If the couple solemnized in marriage is not happy with each other they can seek divorce under this
theory. For this, it is not necessary to establish that one of the party is guilty of another spouse. They
made all the efforts to make their marriage work but nothing happened. The only option available to
the couple who want to live apart was to establish a fault ground before the implementation of 'no
fault theory' and other doesn’t question it. Considering this collusive decree within matrimonial laws,
it has been expressly forbidden. However, the pair were forced to cooperate to secure their freedom
from the matrimonial slavery without any other alternative. The definition of consent divorce was
established in the marriage laws to address the problem faced by such couples. The intention was to
encourage the couple to take legitimate rather than dishonest or collusive means to accomplish
legitimate objectives.

The idea of the principle of consent implies, because people marry via consent, indicating free
will, shall hold power where they can both call off their free will marriage partnership. 1976
amendment of the Hindu Marriage Act, new section 13-B added two grounds of divorce additionally
for divorce by mutual consent.

When parties agree that they cannot live together and are not living together from a year or more
they can move forward to dissolve their marriage but with mutual agreement among them to dissolve
it. Such an appeal would have been determined by the court six months after its filing, if it had not
been withdrawn within 18 months.

2.3. Marriage Theory Indissolubility

Marriage is a rugged connection among a couple, as per this belief system. It concerns union
between bones, skin including flesh. It's timeless. They have to live and die with it, even though the
connections between the parties are unhappy. This is the philosophy of the Hindu Shastric Law.
Neither the actions of the parties nor the death of one of them will break the union. Divorce
construed as abomination. Shastric status was left behind by the Hindu Marriage Act. Even for a
regenerated caste, marriage is no longer an unbreakable rope. Each Hindu is qualified for the
disintegration of marriage if necessary conditions as laid down in Sections 13 and 13(B) exist. From
this point of view, the mentioned Act constitutes indeed a ground breaking legislation piece.
14
 2.4. Will Theory in Divorce

Theory establishes, whenever you please, you will divorce your partner. Marriage here is more
complicated than divorce, when only the reverse should be the case. The Mohammedan Law accepts
this principle.

Consequently, a Muslim spouse of sound mentally, can undergo separation from wife other at
whatever point he so wishes lacking land allocation. He doesn't have to entail interference law
official or area's legal counselor.

The opposite poles are influenced by both ideas that marriage isn’t breakable and that marriage
lasts during gratification of one of parties. In one sense, they are similar in that both remain irrational
including unfair.

First causes woman to oppression of agonizing marriage as well. Second turns marriage into a
game qualifying couple who might call off it any time. In first instance, involved couples purposely
turned their union into prison. Love isn’t stringent incarceration to build a caring home, and there
should be an escape from troubled relationships. A party may arbitrarily dissolve marriage in the
second case, dismissing the sentiments, administrations, powerlessness and, most importantly, the
honesty of the other party. Since Shastric Hindu Law believed in the primary hypothesis, the
subsequent hypothesis issue didn't emerge.

There was also no acceptance of separation at the delight of one or the other party of the marriage
by the normal Hindu law that acknowledged separation among the alleged low networks. Second
theory doesn’t have any stand in front of The Hindu Marriage Act.

2.5. Frustration of Marriage Theory

For a spouse to marriage, the wedlock can be frustrated even if whether the other party isn't
blameworthy of any conjugal offense. It can occur if person has endured or changed his confidence
or revoked or vanished for seemingly forever due to mental unsoundness. According to this theory,
in the event, an individual lean towards a delivery from a particularly pointless marriage, the person
ought to be assisted.

From this point of view, single way is divorce. These grounds are accepted by the Hindu Marriage
Act being appropriate regarding divorce.

15
 2.6. Consent Theory

According to this theory, they should be allowed to have their marriage dissolved if the husband
and wife wanted to execute this for good. They are one with notion that their marriage must live. But
failing to comply with, they shall not be pressured. Persistent living together can lead forth conjugal
infidelity that could lead to divorce.

For both, for parties to marriage and for society, it is favourable advantage to permit dissolution
earlier than marital arrangement is ruined by the criminality or deterioration of one, sometimes both
spouses. This method governing granting divorce has an additional benefit, apart from protecting the
parties from moral degradation, that the Couples are not compelled to clean up after themselves
publicly. They shouldn't have to accuse and reverse accuse one another, or try to maneuver one
another in order to prove that rival side is a sinful. It's accepted that common assent award of
separation would make a couple get separate by wresting the other hesitant gathering's assent by a
negligence, say; pay off or extortion and so forth There is no authentic justification this dread.
Basically, assent suggests (free assent). If a malpractice obtains the consent of a defendant, the
affected party may still deny, so the court will immediately disappear and the basis for divorce.
Against this theory, it is often argued that this is divorce by conspiracy in a way. A misunderstanding
of the difference between agreement and conspiracy is the source of this objection. There is no
question that every collusion is through consensus between the parties, but any agreement between
them does not imply collusion.

2.7. Irretrievable Breakdown Theory

Poorly fitted marriages are the major human and institutional challenge. Numerous relationships
don't fall flat due to the depravity of one's hand, however they simply fizzle.13

Couples want to be good in their marriage, and they do their best, but they're struggling.
Relationships frequently flop because of self- centeredness, ill-manners, hardness, impassion, and
w.r.t. one of party to marriage thinks like these. Such characteristics do not constitute any marital
crime. Yet, marriage remains to get executed. There are a few circumstances where companions
have lived independently and separated from one another for quite a while and it is highly
unlikely out for the other simply because one of the companion wishes the conjugal relationship to
proceed. Over the span of time, customary, irrelevant inconsistencies are disintegrated and can be
seen as the early stage struggles of early conjugal change. While the flood of life, lived in wedded
13
PANDEY AVINASH, Breakdown And Fault Theories of Divorce under Family Law of India.

16
 commonality, can wash away more modest stones, what occurs if the progression of the stream is
disturbed by die-hard inconsistency of brains? We have a weakening of the actual marriage in
such a case, and the solitary way left open is extreme right law to acknowledge what is a reality
and award a separation.

Advantages:

As the jurists have suggested, the solitary value of the hypothesis is that a marriage, which is
recognized in public as a holy establishment, ought to be established anywhere nearby on which a
sound marriage is fabricated that is, resilience, transformation and shared values. The partnership
would not be a happy relationship if one of the spouses is unwilling to live with the other, the
marriage will end. Extending relationship will do more harm than serving with good, yet will breed
hatred and dissatisfaction between the participants. Therefore, such a marriage must be broken in
order to preserve to lessen the quantity of miserable relationships and to forestall the valuable long
stretches of the existences of the companion from being squandered.

Pitfalls:

The Law Commission dealt in depth, demerits of irretrievable breakdown principle in Chap. 4 of
71st Report. Report highlighted two key objections addressed are as follows:

 It's going to make divorce quick. It will encourage the spouses to break the marriage for their
own enjoyment, or even for any of the spouses.

 By dissolution of marriage and being separated and dissolving the union, it urges the liable
mate to exploit his own flaw.

'Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage' A Ground To Dissolve Marriage Invoking Article

In a significant verdict, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court on Monday held that it can
invoke its special powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to grant divorce on the
ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage, which is not yet a statutorily recognised ground. "We
have held that it is possible for this court to dissolve marriage on the ground of irretrievable
breakdown of marriage. That will not contravene the specific or fundamental principles of public
policy", Justice Sanjiv Khanna orally pronounced the operative portion. Justice Khanna said that the
judgment has specified the factors which have to be kept in mind while dissolving marriage on this
ground and how to balance out equities, specifically with regard to maintenance, alimony and the

17
rights of the children.

Notably, the bench also held that the mandatory waiting period of six months for divorce by mutual
consent can be dispensed with subject to the requirements and conditions laid down in the previous
judgments. A Constitution Bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, A.S. Oka,
Vikram Nath, and J.K. Maheshwari pronounced the verdict. The conclusion of the judgment is as
follows : "This Court, in exercise of power under Article 142(1) of the Constitution of India, has the
discretion to dissolve the marriage on the ground of its irretrievable breakdown. This discretionary
power is to be exercised to do ‘complete justice’ to the parties, wherein this Court is satisfied that the
facts established show that the marriage has completely failed and there is no possibility that the
parties will cohabit together, and continuation of the formal legal relationship is unjustified. The
Court as a court of equity, is required to also balance the circumstances and the background in which
the party opposing the dissolution is placed".

Critical Analysis and Impact on society

Over the decades, there has been a change in social thinking in the matter of relationship between
husband and wife. The determination and desire to live separately rather than to remain together
and united in an unhappy marriage is gaining acceptance in our society.

Prior to the enactment of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, divorce was unknown to general Shastric
Hindu laws as marriage was regarded as an eternal bond and considered as an indissoluble union
of husband and wife. Now the legislation and provisions for seeking divorce provides for a
legitimate way to get out of an unpleasant and sorrowful marriage.

The provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 reveals that most of the grounds under sub
sections (1) & (2) of Section 13 are mainly based on fault or guilt theory of marriage. There are
also provisions for dealing with divorce by natural consent under Section 13(B) and Section 14,
which is based on theory of mutual consent of divorce. With regard to ‘Irretrievable Breakdown
of Marriage’, the Government of India has attempted to include it as a ground of divorce under the
Hindu Marriage Act. With the legislation and enactment of various theories of divorce, the
spouses are now more independent and self-reliant. They are prepared to live happy separately
rather than stay united while unhappy.

18
Grant of divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage

The Supreme Court stated that grant of divorce on the ground of irretrievable d that grant of
divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage by this Court is not a matter of
right, but a discretion which is to be exercised with great care and caution. "This Court should be
fully convinced and satisfied that the marriage is totally unworkable, emotionally dead and
beyond salvation and, therefore, dissolution of marriage is the right solution and the only way
forward. That the marriage has irretrievably broken down is to be factually determined and firmly
established"

19
 CONCLUSION

Marriage is considered by Hindus to be a sacred institution. There was no framework for divorce
subsequent to 1955, Hindu Marriage Act. For the Indian community then, the idea of getting
divorced was a taboo. Silent victims to such a structure of rigid nature were the wives. The current
situation and conditions has changed, also the society has modified. By obtaining a divorce via
decree from court, law now offers a means to quit an unhappy forced institution. Women who
presently don't need to subtly endure the maltreatment or mistreatment caused to them by spouses are
the genuine recipient of such a provision. However, marriage system will be absolutely suspended
has become the biggest fear after looking into the approach of judiciary in dealing with issue
reflecting breakups in irretrievable marriage.

Every philosophy has both upsides and its downsides. Their relevance fluctuates depending on the
occasions. It is therefore delicate for our country's lawmakers to deal with this topic in a very careful
way after considering its possible consequences in depth.

In order to see peace and harmony in society, the idea of divorce has arisen. If married couples do
not live peacefully, there would be no peace in society. For legitimate purposes, the couple to the
wedding cannot be permitted to live together if they do not wish to do so. Having accepted the same
thing, the principle of divorce has been recognized by all cultures regardless of their religious
ambitions. The fault theory and the theory of no fault also arisen based on its existence.

20
REFERENCES

1. https://indianlawportal.co.in/theories-of-divorce-under-hindu-law/
2. https://www.google.com/search?
q=Supreme+court+on+Divorce+2019&rlz=1C1CHBF_enIN1030IN1030&oq=Sup
reme+court+on+Divorce+2019&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIHCAE
QIRigAdIBCjExMjI4ajBqMTWoAgCwAgA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
3. https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/irretrievable-breakdown-of-marriage-a-ground-
to-dissolve-marriage-invoking-article-142-powers-supreme-court-227617
4. https://www.jetir.org/papers/JETIREV06026.pdf
5. https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?tab=rm&ogbl#inbox/
KtbxLrjRdwxxNPxdBzRmLJzBRlcfdgJzdV?projector=1&messagePartId=0.2
6. https://www.google.com/search?
q=theories+of+divorce+under+hindu+law+pdf&rlz=1C1CHBF_enIN1030IN1030&sxsrf=
APwXEdfunCBi15FG6_2NId_SyX6rviKKkA:1684342829595&source=lnms&tbm=isch
&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjuv6aA6vzAhXsmlYBHa9rBV8Q_AUoAnoECAEQBA&biw=23
04&bih=1118&dpr=0.83#imgrc=ZBCAVPA08UrkOM&imgdii=dfWKGhQnJkfMjM,
7. https://legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-8703-theories-of-divorce.html

21