The Madras High Court has called for a rethink of the Hindu marriage law when it comes to remarriage after divorce, saying a spouse should not have to wait for years because of an appeal against the divorce decree. Holding that the right to marry is a human right, the court suggested a two-month window to obtain an interim stay and dismissed the husband’s appeal as infructuous after the wife remarried.Justices G R Swaminathan and M D Sumathi were hearing an appeal against a March 3, 2021 order of a family court that had granted divorce to the wife on grounds of cruelty and desertion. The husband challenged the decree, but his appeal was later dismissed for non-prosecution and restored in March 2026. By then, the wife had remarried, leading the court to consider whether the appeal had become infructuous.“Right to marry is a human right. Of course, subject to conditions…We would respectfully suggest that Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act deserves an amendment. It should not be enough if the appeal is presented within time. The appellant must also obtain an interim stay of the decree of divorce within two months thereafter,” said the court on August 13.The couple got married on June 3, 2001, according to Hindu rites and customs. They had two children. Later, the wife approached the family court alleging cruelty and desertion, and it allowed her petition on March 3, 2021. The husband challenged this before the high court. Justices G R Swaminathan and M D Sumathi said prolonged appeals should not leave remarriage uncertain for years. (Image enhanced using AI)Court flags uncertainty over prolonged appealsTaking note that the wife remarried on August 27, 2021, and the marriage was registered on September 2, 2021, the high court said that the appeal had been filed in time and was listed on August 9, 2021. It noted that there was no representation on that date and notice was ordered on August 11. The matter was taken up again in October 2025, and the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution on November 5, 2025, but was restored on March 30, 2026.Further stating that there had been no interim stay of the divorce decree, the court examined Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which deals with when a divorced person may remarry. The provision permits remarriage where there is no right of appeal, the time for filing an appeal has expired without one being filed, or an appeal has been presented but dismissed.Citing Supreme Court decisions including N Rajendran v S Valli, Krishnaveni Rai v Pangaj Rai and Lila Gupta v Laxmi Narain, the court said that the absence of a stay meant the divorce decree remained in force when the respondent remarried. It also expressed concern that a marriage could otherwise remain subject to the uncertain outcome of an appeal that may take years to conclude.Story continues below this adSuggestions for amendment to Section 15Referring to a 2003 article titled “Post Divorce Marriages Pending Appeal”, published in the Journal of the Indian Law Institute, the court said Section 15 “deserves an amendment” and suggested that filing an appeal within the limitation period should not by itself restrict remarriage indefinitely. It also suggested that the appellant should be required to obtain an interim stay of the divorce decree within two months.Clarifying that it was suggesting a legislative amendment and was not itself creating such a two-month requirement, the court said that adding such a condition to Section 15 would amount to rewriting the statutory provision.It further said that the issue was particularly significant because matrimonial appeals can take years to conclude and making a valid marriage depend on the uncertain outcome of such proceedings, it observed, “does not appear to be equitable”.Court upholds divorce on cruelty, desertionUpholding the family court’s findings of cruelty and desertion, the court said that the husband had questioned his wife’s character, made enquiries with the security guard and asked their daughter about the person she was speaking to on the phone, which amounted to cruelty.Story continues below this adThe wife had left the matrimonial home with the children on August 15, 2015, but the husband neither asked her to return nor made any effort to reconcile, the court said, adding that his indifference and failure to maintain the children amounted to willful neglect and constructive desertion.Noting that the husband had allowed the appeal to be dismissed for default, the court said that once an appeal is dismissed for default or non-prosecution, Section 15 no longer restricts remarriage. After the appeal was restored, the court was informed that the wife had remarried, making the appeal infructuous, it said.