News Citation : 2026 LN (HC) 88 | 2026:CGHC:4464-DB
January 27, 2026 : The High Court of Chhattisgarh has dismissed a husband’s appeal seeking dissolution of marriage for the second time, holding that the fresh divorce petition was barred by the principle of res judicata as it was founded on the very same allegations of cruelty and desertion that had already been conclusively rejected years earlier.
A Division Bench of the High Court of Chhattisgarh, comprising Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal and Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, upheld the 2018 judgment of the Family Court, Mahasamund, which had refused to grant divorce to the appellant-husband.
The couple was married in April 1993 according to Hindu rites and had two children from the marriage. They began living separately in September 2001. In 2002, the husband had first approached the civil court seeking divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, alleging cruelty and desertion. That suit was dismissed in April 2004. His appeal against the decision was also rejected by the High Court in June 2007, with findings that the wife had suffered a fracture due to being pushed by the husband and that no cruelty or desertion on her part was proved.
More than a decade later, in 2014, the husband again filed a divorce petition before the Family Court, Mahasamund, contending that the marriage had irretrievably broken down as the parties had been living apart since 2001. The wife opposed the plea, arguing that the second suit was legally barred since the earlier proceedings on identical grounds had already attained finality.
Accepting the wife’s objection, the Family Court held that the fresh petition was hit by Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which embodies the doctrine of res judicata. The court also independently examined the merits and concluded that the husband had failed to establish cruelty or desertion.
Dismissing the appeal, the High Court noted that both divorce proceedings were based on the same cause of action arising in September 2001. The court observed that the husband had not pleaded any new or subsequent events occurring after the dismissal of the earlier suit that could give rise to a fresh cause of action. Since the earlier findings had become final, the second attempt amounted to re-litigation of settled issues.
The Bench further clarified that the principle of res judicata applies to matrimonial proceedings as well, relying on Supreme Court precedent and the statutory framework governing family courts. Even on merits, the High Court found no evidence to support the allegations of cruelty or desertion. Finding no legal infirmity in the Family Court’s decision, the High Court dismissed the appeal.
Case Reference : FAM No. 43 of 2019, Udayram Basant vs. Smt. Jyoti; Counsels: For the Appellant, Mr. Badruddin Khan, Advocate; for the Respondent, Mr. Animesh Verma, Advocate.
