Supreme Court – Daily Orders
Doli Tyagi vs Vimal Tyagi on 13 February, 2026
Author: Vikram Nath
Bench: Vikram Nath
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NOS……..…………… OF 2026
(ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NOS. 25928-25929 OF 2024)
DOLI TYAGI …APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
VIMAL TYAGI …RESPONDENT(S)
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. The present appeals arise out of interim order dated
21st August 2023 in CM Appl. No. 25481/2022 in
Mat.App.(F.C.) No. 78 of 2022, and the final order
and judgment dated 28th February 2024 in Mat.App.
(F.C.) No. 78 of 2022, passed by the High Court of
Delhi.
3. The facts giving rise to the present appeal, shorn of
unnecessary details, are as under:
3.1. The appellant-wife and the respondent-husband got
married on 16th April 2016 at Ghaziabad, Uttar
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by
RASHI GUPTA
Pradesh. After their wedding, the parties went
Date: 2026.03.12
18:48:55 IST
Reason:
together with the husband’s parents, brother and
sister to reside at the matrimonial home in DistrictC.A. @ SLP (C) NOS. 25928-25929 OF 2024 1
Hapur, Uttar Pradesh. Two weeks after the wedding,
the husband returned to Delhi, where he was
employed as an Operations Manager at Aarogya
Pathcare Lab, Tilak Nagar, Delhi.
3.2. The parties have one son, born on 29th July 2017,
who is presently eight years of age.
3.3. The wife and their son resided in the matrimonial
home for the most part but subsequently came to
reside with the husband in Delhi for a few days,
however, on 16th August 2019, they left his Delhi
residence.
3.4. Several disputes arose between the parties as well
as between the wife and the husband’s family. The
husband alleged that the wife was interested in
properties belonging to his father and demanded
that these be transferred in her name. On account
of such demands, the husband alleged that he and
his family were subjected to threats and persistent
harassment.
3.5. In September 2019, the husband filed Divorce
Petition No. 514/2019 before the Family Court
under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act,
1955, seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground
of cruelty.
C.A. @ SLP (C) NOS. 25928-25929 OF 2024 2
3.6. The wife did not appear before the Family Court and
did not contest the divorce petition.
3.7. The Family Court, vide order dated 6th April 2022,
dismissed the divorce petition, holding that no
cruelty had been proved against the wife. Aggrieved
by the said order, the husband preferred an appeal
before the High Court of Delhi.
3.8. The High Court, vide its first impugned interim
order dated 21st August 2023, allowed the
husband’s application filed under Section 151 read
with Order XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908, permitting him to place additional
documents on record.
3.9. The High Court, vide its second impugned order
dated 28th February 2024, allowed the husband’s
appeal and granted a decree of divorce on the
ground of mental cruelty. The High Court held that
the wife’s complete disinterest in the matrimonial
relationship and her failure to make any effort to
reside with the husband constituted an act of
cruelty on her part.
3.10. Aggrieved by the orders of the High Court, the
appellant-wife is before this Court.
C.A. @ SLP (C) NOS. 25928-25929 OF 2024 3
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at
length. Both parties were personally present in Court
and were also interacted with by this Court.
5. Having carefully perused the record and considered
the history of the case, including the prolonged
acrimony and the serious allegations made by the
parties against each other, we do not find any ground
to interfere with the decree of divorce granted by the
High Court. It is evident that there has been a
complete and irretrievable breakdown of the marriage
between the parties, who have, for all practical
purposes, ceased to live together as a married couple
for several years. In such circumstances, compelling
the parties to continue in a legal relationship against
their will would only perpetuate bitterness and would
not serve the interests of either party or their child.
6. We are cognisant of the fact that in situations such
as the present, the welfare and best interests of the
child born of the marriage must remain paramount.
The parties have one son, who is eight years of age.
The child is presently residing with the appellant-
mother in a house owned by the respondent-
husband’s father. Given the age and vulnerability of
the child, and the necessity of providing him with a
stable, nurturing and secure environment, this Court
C.A. @ SLP (C) NOS. 25928-25929 OF 2024 4
is of the view that appropriate directions need to be
issued with respect to his custody, welfare, education
and future needs.
7. Having interacted with the parties, it became evident
that the issues concerning custody, visitation rights
in respect of the child, as well as the financial
settlement for the appellant-wife, require a clear and
final resolution so as to bring an end to the
protracted litigation between them and allow both
parties to move forward with their lives. We are
accordingly inclined, in exercise of our jurisdiction
under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, to give
certain directions which, without disturbing the
decree of divorce granted by the High Court, will
address these matters comprehensively and do
complete justice between the parties.
8. We therefore pass the following directions:
(I) Custody of the minor son shall continue to vest
with the appellant-mother. Given the tender age
of the child and the established bond between
the child and his mother, we are of the view
that the child’s best interests are served by his
continuing to reside with her. The appellant-
C.A. @ SLP (C) NOS. 25928-25929 OF 2024 5
mother shall be responsible for the day-to-day
care, welfare and upbringing of the child.
(II) Visitation rights are granted to the respondent-
father as follows:
(i) The respondent-father shall be entitled to
visit and spend time with the child every
month on dates to be mutually agreed upon
by both parties, with reasonable advance
notice. In the event of disagreement, the
respondent shall be entitled to spend time
with the child on the second and fourth
weekends of every month.
(ii) During school summer vacations, the child
shall spend fifty percent (50%) of the
vacation period with the respondent-father
and the remaining fifty percent (50%) with
the appellant-mother. The parties shall
coordinate the schedule in a spirit of mutual
cooperation and in the best interests of the
child. In case of disagreement, the vacation
shall be divided into two equal halves, with
the child spending the first half with the
respondent-father and the second half with
the appellant-mother.
C.A. @ SLP (C) NOS. 25928-25929 OF 2024 6
(iii) Both parties shall ensure that the child is
not exposed to any bitterness or acrimony
arising from the matrimonial dispute, and
shall cooperate with each other to foster a
healthy and loving relationship between the
child and both his parents.
(III) Having regard to the circumstances of the
parties, including the respondent-husband’s
financial capacity, the fact that the appellant-
wife has been residing in the matrimonial home
of the respondent’s family, her need for
independent accommodation and financial
security for herself and the child, and the
desirability of a final and comprehensive
settlement between the parties, this Court is of
the view that a one-time lump sum settlement
is appropriate and just in the facts of this case –
(i) The respondent-husband shall accordingly
pay a sum of Rs. 40,00,000/- (Rupees Forty
Lakhs only) as a one-time lump sum
settlement to the appellant-wife. This
amount is intended to provide for the
appellant-wife’s independent accommodation
and to secure her future well-being. The said
C.A. @ SLP (C) NOS. 25928-25929 OF 2024 7
amount shall be paid by the respondent-
husband on or before 31st March 2026.
(ii) The appellant-wife to furnish her bank
details to the respondent-husband to
facilitate the same.
(iii) Upon receipt of the aforesaid amount in full,
the appellant-wife shall vacate the premises
belonging to the respondent’s father, which
she is presently occupying, on or before 30th
June 2026. The appellant-wife shall take all
necessary steps to hand over vacant and
peaceful possession of the said premises on
or before the said date.
(iv) The respondent-husband shall bear all
expenses towards the education of the minor
son, including school fees, tuition fees,
books, uniforms and other incidental
expenses, for so long as the child is pursuing
his studies. Additionally, the respondent-
husband shall bear the expenses for the
marriage of the son, when the occasion
arises. The school where the child shall be
enrolled shall be selected by the appellant-
C.A. @ SLP (C) NOS. 25928-25929 OF 2024 8
mother, having due regard to the child’s best
interests and access to quality education.
(IV) We note that during the course of the parties’
litigation, the appellant-wife had filed a petition
being Case No. 96/2023 under Section 125 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking
maintenance in which the wife was granted a
monthly maintenance of Rs.5000/- (Rupees
Five Thousand only) for herself and Rs.2000
(Rupees Two Thousand only) for their son. In
light of the comprehensive one-time settlement
directed herein, which is intended to provide for
the future well-being of both the appellant-wife
and the child, the maintenance order, if any,
presently in operation shall stand ceased and
discharged from March 2026, upon payment of
the settlement amount by the respondent.
(V) In view of the above directions, all cases
pending between the parties and their family
members, shall stand closed and disposed of.
Accordingly, in light of the present order, all the
below mentioned proceedings and any other
criminal or civil proceeding pending between
these parties, shall be treated as closed and no
further steps shall be taken therein by any
C.A. @ SLP (C) NOS. 25928-25929 OF 2024 9
party. Registry to communicate this order to the
respective Courts for passing formal orders of
closure. The pending proceedings are detailed
below:
a. Crl. Case 1863/2022 arising out of FIR
No.219/2022 dated 9th June 2022 in
P.S.Simbhavli, District Hapur, pending before
the Civil Judge (Junior Division)
Garhmukteshwar, District Hapur, Uttar
Pradesh.
b. Complaint Case No.162/2022 under Sections
of the Protection of Women from Domestic
Violence Act, 2005, pending before the Civil
Judge (Junior Division) Garhmukteshwar,
District Hapur, Uttar Pradesh.
c. Child Custody Case No.58/2022, pending
before the Principal Judge, Family Court,
District Hapur, Uttar Pradesh.
d. Civil Suit No.132/2022 pending before the
Civil Judge (Junior Division)
Garhmukteshwar, District Hapur, Uttar
Pradesh.
e. Complaint Case No.1919/2022 under Section
500 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 pending
C.A. @ SLP (C) NOS. 25928-25929 OF 2024 10
before the Civil Judge (Junior Division)
Garhmukteshwar, District Hapur, Uttar
Pradesh.
f. Maintenance Case No.96/2023 under Section
125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
which has been finally decided.
9. In exercise of the jurisdiction vested in this Court
under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, with a
view to doing complete justice between the parties
and securing the welfare and best interests of the
minor child, the present appeals are accordingly
disposed of in terms of the directions above. The
decree of divorce granted by the High Court of Delhi
vide its order dated 28th February 2024 is upheld.
10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed
of.
………………………………………..J.
[VIKRAM NATH]
………………………………………..J.
[SANDEEP MEHTA]
NEW DELHI
C.A. @ SLP (C) NOS. 25928-25929 OF 2024 11
FEBRUARY 13, 2026
ITEM NO.43 COURT NO.2 SECTION XIV
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).
25928-25929/2024
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated
28-02-2024 in MATAPP(FC) No. 78/2022 21-08-2023 in
CMAPPL No. 25481/2022 passed by the High Court of Delhi
at New Delhi]
DOLI TYAGI Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
VIMAL TYAGI Respondent(s)
IA No. 241697/2024 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE
IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No. 241699/2024 –
EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
Date : 13-02-2026 This matter was called on for hearing
today.
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Varun Punia, AOR
Mr. Siddharth Mittal, Adv.
Mr. Akash Kumar Singh, Adv.
For Respondent(s) :Mr. Avadh Bihari Kaushik, AOR
Mr. Pawan Kumar Verma, Adv.
Mr. Rishabh Kumar, Adv.
C.A. @ SLP (C) NOS. 25928-25929 OF 2024 12
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. Appeals are disposed of in terms of the Signed Order
which is placed on the file.
3. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(RASHI GUPTA) (RANJANA SHAILEY)
COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
C.A. @ SLP (C) NOS. 25928-25929 OF 2024 13
