Dhananjay Rathi v. Ruchika Rathi, 2026
A party may withdraw consent in mutual divorce proceedings, but cannot resile from a duly executed and court-approved mediation settlement unless vitiated by fraud, coercion, or non-performance.
Judgement Details
Court
Supreme Court of India
Date of Decision
13 April 2026
Judges
Justice Rajesh Bindal & Justice Vijay Bishnoi
Citation
Acts / Provisions
Facts of the Case
-
The parties were married in 2000 and lived together for over two decades.
-
In 2023, the husband filed for divorce, and the matter was referred to mediation by the Family Court.
-
A comprehensive settlement agreement was reached, including financial and property arrangements:
-
Husband agreed to pay ₹1.5 crore in installments
-
₹14 lakh for purchase of a car
-
Transfer of jewellery and settlement of disputes
-
Wife agreed to transfer ₹2.52 crore from joint business account
-
-
Both parties filed a mutual consent divorce petition.
-
The husband complied with initial terms, and the wife also transferred the agreed amount.
-
However, before the second motion, the wife withdrew her consent for divorce.
-
She also initiated proceedings under Section 12 DV Act against the husband and his mother.
-
The husband sought quashing of DV proceedings and dissolution of marriage under Article 142.
Issues
-
Whether a party can withdraw from a mutual consent divorce settlement after a full and final mediation agreement has been executed?
-
Whether mediation settlements once accepted and acted upon can be unilaterally repudiated?
-
Whether subsequent DV Act proceedings can be used to circumvent a concluded settlement?
-
Whether the Supreme Court can dissolve marriage under Article 142 in cases of irretrievable breakdown?
Judgement
-
The Court acknowledged that mutual consent divorce permits withdrawal of consent before final decree.
-
However, it held that once parties enter into a comprehensive mediated settlement, they are bound by its terms.
-
It ruled that a party cannot resile from a settlement reached through mediation and court approval, except in limited circumstances.
-
The Court emphasized that mediation settlements replace the original dispute and become binding obligations.
-
It held that allowing withdrawal would undermine the credibility and purpose of mediation systems.
-
The Court stated that deviation from settlement terms should attract strict consequences including heavy costs.
-
It clarified exceptions where withdrawal is permissible:
-
fraud
-
coercion
-
undue influence
-
non-performance by the other party
-
-
The Court rejected the wife’s claim of additional undisclosed financial promises, calling it legally untenable and unsupported.
-
It observed that the DV Act proceedings were an afterthought designed to prolong litigation.
-
The Court found that the marriage had irretrievably broken down.
-
Exercising powers under Article 142, it:
-
dissolved the marriage
-
quashed DV proceedings
-
directed payment of remaining settlement amounts
-
Held
-
A party cannot unilaterally withdraw from a mediated settlement once acted upon and confirmed.
-
Mediation settlement becomes binding and enforceable like a contract with judicial backing.
-
DV proceedings filed after settlement may be treated as abuse of process if found retaliatory.
-
Marriage was dissolved under Article 142.
-
Settlement obligations were directed to be completed.
Analysis
-
The judgment strongly reinforces the institutional sanctity of mediation in India.
-
It distinguishes between:
-
statutory right to withdraw consent in mutual divorce, and
-
contractual binding nature of mediated settlements
-
-
It protects finality in dispute resolution mechanisms, preventing strategic litigation.
-
The Court adopts a strict stance against forum shopping and post-settlement retaliation litigation.
-
It clarifies that mediation is not informal negotiation but a legally enforceable dispute resolution process.
-
The ruling expands the use of Article 142 in matrimonial breakdown cases.
-
It signals judicial intolerance toward abuse of DV Act proceedings as pressure tactics.