The Supreme Court recently held that a spouse cannot withdraw from a mutual divorce settlement after agreeing to dissolve the marriage as part of a full and final settlement of disputes..A Bench of Justices Rajesh Bindal and Vijay Bishnoi said that while the law allows parties to withdraw consent before a decree of mutual divorce is granted, this right cannot be used to avoid obligations under a settlement resolving all disputes between them.The Bench clarified that once parties agree on the terms of separation, they cannot step back from those terms.It also stressed that settlements reached through mediation must be treated seriously and any attempt to go back on such terms must be dealt with strictly and heavy costs should be imposed.“It is trite law that once the parties have entered into a settlement agreement which was duly authenticated by the mediator, in case of any resilement from such terms as agreed upon in the settlement, the resiling party must be encumbered with heavy costs, Any deviation from the terms of the settlement arrived in mediation and later confirmed by the Court should be dealt with strictly as such deviation harbors an attack to the foundational basis of the entire process of mediation,” the Court said.The Bench also clarified that a party may resile from a settlement in limited circumstances if it can show that the agreement was vitiated by fraud, coercion or undue influence, or that the other party failed to comply with its terms.The Court was dealing with a matrimonial dispute in which the wife withdrew her consent for mutual divorce after entering into and partly acting on a mediation settlement..The top court was hearing appeal filed by the husband challenging a Delhi High Court order which had allowed the domestic violence proceedings filed by wife to continue, even though the parties had earlier entered into a mediation settlement.The couple got married in 2000 and two children were born out of the wedlock. However, due to matrimonial and temperamental differences, they began living separately around 2022–23. The husband later approached the family court seeking divorce on the grounds of cruelty and adultery. The matter was referred to mediation, wherein the parties agreed to settle all disputes and proceed with a mutual consent divorce. The first motion for divorce was allowed in August 2024 after the parties complied with its terms. However, before the second motion could be completed, the wife withdrew her consent.The husband initially filed a contempt petition alleging breach of the settlement, but later withdrew it to approach the Delhi High Court.Soon thereafter, the wife initiated proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act in October 2025.The husband moved the High Court seeking the quashing of the proceedings initiated under the DV Act. However, the High Court allowed the case to continue, subject to certain conditions.Aggrieved by this, the husband approached the Supreme Court, contending that the wife could not back out of the settlement and that the proceedings were an abuse of process..After considering the case, the Supreme Court found the domestic violence case to be “premeditated” and an “afterthought.” It noted that such allegations were raised for the first time after more than two decades of marriage and only after the dispute over the settlement arose.The Bench held that allowing such proceedings to continue would amount to an abuse of the process of law and accordingly quashed the domestic violence proceedings initiated by the wife.It also noted that the marriage had irretrievably broken down and that there was no possibility of reconciliation between the parties.Thus, the Court dissolved the marriage on the ground of irretrievable breakdown. It also directed the parties to comply with the remaining terms of the settlement..[Read Judgment]
