{"id":254873,"date":"2021-09-29T15:00:21","date_gmt":"2021-09-29T09:30:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=254873"},"modified":"2021-10-08T10:34:17","modified_gmt":"2021-10-08T05:04:17","slug":"mere-use-of-word-irrevocably-does-not-render-pronouncement-of-talaq-illegal-if-intention-of-the-husband-shows-otherwise","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/29\/mere-use-of-word-irrevocably-does-not-render-pronouncement-of-talaq-illegal-if-intention-of-the-husband-shows-otherwise\/","title":{"rendered":"Ker HC | Mere use of word \u2018irrevocably\u2019 does not render pronouncement of talaq illegal if intention of the husband shows otherwise; HC states"},"content":{"rendered":"

Kerala High Court:<\/strong> The Division Bench of A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Mohammed Nias C.P., JJ., held that mere use of word \u2018irrevocably\u2019<\/em><\/strong> does not render pronouncement of talaq illegal if intention of the husband shows otherwise.<\/p>\n

Factual Fulcrum of the Case<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n

In the instant case, the appellant-A.Sajani had filed a matrimonial suit against her husband-Dr. B. Kalam Pasha, a serving judicial officer in the State of Kerala. The grievance of the appellant was that the respondent had deserted her, had sent her a Talaqnama and had contracted another marriage with a younger girl. Pleading that the talaqnama was not a valid one in law, the appellant contented there was only a single pronouncement of talaq and it was made irrevocable thereby rendering it illegal and void going by the law laid down in Shayara Bano v. Union of India,<\/em> (2017) 9 SCC 1<\/a>, and that no valid grounds had been established by the respondent that would have enabled him to divorce her.<\/p>\n

The respondent-husband argued that he had pronounced \u2018Talaq Ahsan\u2019 and the use of the word \u2018irrevocably\u2019<\/em><\/strong> was only to alert his wife of the seriousness of the decision and to indicate that it was not to be taken lightly. The respondent contended that since there had been only a single pronouncement, notwithstanding the express use of the word \u2018irrevocably\u2019 in the talaqnama it had to be seen as a Talaq Ahsan.<\/p>\n

Findings of the Family Court <\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n

The Family Court denied the prayer for restitution of conjugal rights holding that the talaq was a talaq ahsan and valid.<\/p>\n

Observation and Analysis <\/strong><\/h3>\n

In Shayara Bano v. Union of India<\/em> \u2013 (2017) 9 SCC 1<\/a>, the practice of \u201cTalaq-e-Biddat \u2013Triple Talaq was set aside\u2019; the nature and characteristic features of a triple talaq or talaq-e-biddat that was found objectionable by the Court and which led the Court to hold the practice as bad in law was its instant irrevocability that rendered the practice \u2018manifestly arbitrary\u2019<\/em> in the sense that the marital tie can be broken capriciously and whimsically by a Muslim man without any attempt at reconciliation so as to save it.<\/p>\n

Similarly, in Shamim Ara v. State of UP<\/em> \u2013 (2002) 7 SCC 518<\/a>, the Supreme Court spelt out the requirements of a valid talaq as<\/p>\n