The Kerala High Court has ruled that a woman’s remarriage during the pendency of a divorce appeal filed after the limitation period cannot be treated as unlawful. While dismissing the husband's challenge to the divorce decree, the court ordered a fresh examination of the Family Court's direction requiring him to pay ₹20 lakh as permanent alimony.
Background of the Case
The dispute arose from a matrimonial case filed by the wife before the Family Court, Muvattupuzha, seeking divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion along with permanent maintenance. She alleged that after their marriage, she was subjected to ill-treatment and repeated demands for dowry.
The Family Court accepted her case and, in February 2024, dissolved the marriage. It also directed the husband to pay ₹20 lakh as permanent alimony. The husband later challenged that decision before the High Court.
During the pendency of the appeal, the wife remarried in September 2025. The husband argued that the remarriage was invalid because the appeal against the divorce decree was still pending.
Court's Observations
The division bench rejected the husband's contention and clarified the scope of Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
“The bar under Section 15 applies only where an appeal is filed within the prescribed period,” the court observed while examining the legal position. Since the husband's appeal had been filed with a delay of 12 days and was entertained only after condonation of delay, the statutory restriction on remarriage did not apply.
The bench also noted that there was no interim order preventing the wife from remarrying during the pendency of the proceedings.
Referring to Supreme Court precedents, the court said that a temporary restriction on remarriage does not mean that the earlier marriage continues to exist. Consequently, the husband's argument that the second marriage was void could not be accepted.
Alimony Award Reconsidered
On the issue of permanent alimony, the High Court took a different view.
The bench noted that the Family Court had awarded ₹20 lakh in permanent alimony without any evidence being produced on behalf of the husband. The court also considered the fact that circumstances had changed after the wife's remarriage.
“The issue of entitlement to permanent alimony and its quantification would have to be necessarily examined afresh,” the bench observed.
Decision
The High Court held that the challenge to the divorce decree had become infructuous because the wife had already remarried lawfully. Accordingly, that part of the appeal was dismissed.
However, the court set aside the Family Court's order directing payment of ₹20 lakh as permanent alimony and remanded the issue for fresh adjudication after giving both parties an opportunity to lead evidence. The Family Court was asked to complete the exercise within two months of receiving the judgment.
The matrimonial appeal was thus partly allowed.
Case Details
Case Title: Vijay R. Nair v. Lijitha
Case Number: Mat. Appeal No. 501 of 2024
Judges: Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Preeta A.K.
Decision Date: June 12, 2026
