Delhi HC: Spouse can sue other’s paramour for damages for interfering in marriage

Issues summons in a suit where a wife has sought ₹4 crore in damages for alienation of affection (AoA) from her husband’s alleged paramour

A spouse can sue an alleged paramour for damages if their wilful interference damaged the marriage, the Delhi high court has held, while issuing summons in a suit where a wife has sought ₹4 crore in damages for alienation of affection (AoA) from her husband’s alleged paramour.

The court said ongoing divorce proceedings do not prevent a civil claim for damages. (Representational image)

AoA is a tort (civil wrong) , originating in Anglo-American common law, allowing a spouse to seek monetary compensation from a third party accused of breaking up a marriage or causing loss of affection. These “heart balm” torts are not codified under any Indian law.

Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, in an order delivered Monday and later released, noted that Indian matrimonial laws, including the Hindu Marriage Act, provide no remedy against a third party before a family court. In such cases, he said, a civil court can hear claims for damages over wrongful interference.

The couple married in 2012 and had twins in 2018.The alleged paramour joined the husband’s company as an analyst and developed a close relationship with him, despite knowing that he was married. In 2023, the husband filed for divorce on the grounds of cruelty, following which the wife approached the high court this year, seeking damages from the alleged paramour.

Represented by advocate Malavika Rajkotia, the wife argued she was entitled to her husband’s affection and companionship, which were deliberately taken away. The husband, represented by advocate Prabhjit Jauhar, opposed the suit, saying adultery was already under consideration by the family court and that the civil case was merely a counterblast to divorce proceedings.

The alleged paramour, through advocate KC Jain, besides challenging the maintainability of the suit, contended that the present suit amounted to initiating parallel proceedings on the same issue. Jain further contended that the woman could not seek damages from her, since she had no legal obligation to refrain from interacting with the man.

The court disagreed, stating that ongoing divorce proceedings do not prevent a civil claim for damages. “Neither the Hindu Marriage Act nor any other matrimonial law provides a remedy against third parties,” justice Kaurav held. “In the absence of a statutory bar, a spouse can seek damages in civil court for a third party’s alleged interference.”

It added, “Here, the plaint asserts a third-party tort and seeks monetary compensation for that civil wrong. Such a claim is quintessentially within the purview of the ordinary civil courts, and not one over which the family court has exclusive jurisdiction. The pendency of parallel matrimonial proceedings ...does not bar the institution of this separate civil suit for damages...”

The judgment also said personal liberty, including ending or changing a relationship, is not a crime, but it can have civil consequences. “When one spouse claims legal injury from a marriage’s breakdown, the law recognises compensation may be sought from those alleged to have caused the breach,” it said.

Citing American jurist Wesley Newcomb Hohfeld, the court added: “If a spouse has a protectable interest in marital consortium, intimacy, and companionship, a third party has a duty not to intentionally and wrongfully interfere. At the same time, a spouse retains the liberty to make personal choices. Where a spouse’s conduct is entirely voluntary and uncoerced, that exercise of liberty will defeat third-party liability.”