India Supreme Court Plea Tests Limits of Foreign Divorce Proceedings

A writ petition filed by a woman before the Supreme Court seeking to halt divorce proceedings initiated in Rhode Island, US, has reignited a longstanding question in cross-border marriages: when a marriage is solemnised under Indian Christian law, can an Indian court prevent a spouse from pursuing divorce abroad?

 

In her petition, the woman described the foreign proceedings as “a grave issue of transnational matrimonial abuse, forum shopping, coercive foreign divorce proceedings and violation of the fundamental rights of an Indian woman.”

 

The marriage was solemnised under Indian Christian rites and later registered in Tamil Nadu under the Tamil Nadu Registration of Marriages Act, 2009. The petitioner claims she remains domiciled in India and that the marriage is governed by the Indian Divorce Act, 1869.

 

According to the plea, the husband initiated the divorce in October 2025 “without the petitioner’s consent and submission to its jurisdiction.” The proceedings are described as “ex facie without jurisdiction, oppressive and constitutionally impermissible” and allegedly being used as “an instrument of extortion, coercion and economic abuse.”

 

“The cause of action is continuous and subsisting in India,” the petition states, adding that she is “remediless before foreign courts, which lack jurisdiction under Indian law.”

 

Recognition of foreign judgments

The enforceability of foreign divorce decrees in India is governed by the Code of Civil Procedure. Section 13 states that a foreign judgment is not conclusive if it is passed without jurisdiction, violates Indian law, or is obtained by fraud. Section 14 allows courts to presume jurisdiction unless proven otherwise. Section 44A permits execution of decrees from reciprocating territories, provided they meet the tests under Section 13.

 

For Christian marriages, the statutory framework separates solemnisation from dissolution. Section 88 of the Indian Divorce Act preserves the primacy of personal law, determining grounds for divorce, while the Registration of Marriages Act governs formalisation of the union.

 

Indian courts and foreign proceedings

Indian courts can issue “anti-suit injunctions” to restrain parties from pursuing litigation abroad when one spouse moves a foreign court despite the marriage being governed by Indian personal law. Such injunctions are discretionary and guided by principles established in Modi Entertainment Network vs WSG Cricket, requiring courts to weigh the ends of justice against comity between judicial systems.

 

The Supreme Court has previously applied this principle in cases such as Vivek Rai Gupta v. Niyati Gupta, where a wife obtained a divorce in Ohio despite an interim direction from the Supreme Court not to continue proceedings. The Court restrained enforcement of the foreign decree in India, ensuring it did not alter legal rights within the country, though it did not invalidate the order abroad.

 

Where a foreign decree is later brought for enforcement, the aggrieved party may argue it is “not executable” in India, especially if it was obtained in violation of an Indian injunction. Indian courts cannot dictate enforcement abroad but can prevent a party from relying on the decree within India if it undermines justice or existing court orders.

 

Legal precedent

The Supreme Court in Y Narasimha Rao v. Y Venkata Lakshmi (1991) held that matrimonial disputes must be adjudicated by courts with competent jurisdiction in accordance with the parties’ personal law and domicile. The current petition invokes this principle, arguing that attempting a foreign divorce seeks to “defeat Indian law.”

 

For any enquiries or information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call us on +971 52 644 3004. Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.