Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra (2002) 3 SCC 388

PUBLISH_DATE: 24 Oct 2025 • AUTHOR_NAME: Gulzar Hashmi • LOCATION: India

This case asks a hard question: Can anyone get relief after the Supreme Court has finally decided and even dismissed review? The Constitution Bench said, “Final is final,” yet opened a very narrow last door—the curative petition—to avoid a serious miscarriage of justice. The case also concerns divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and the effect of withdrawal of consent.

• Whether an aggrieved person can get any relief against a final Supreme Court judgment after dismissal of review—under Article 32 or otherwise.
• Whether a decree of mutual consent divorce can be granted if one party withdraws consent before the decree.

• Finality of Supreme Court decisions: Normally, once review is dismissed, the matter ends. The Court, however, may consider a curative petition in rare cases to prevent grave injustice.
• Section 13B, HMA 1955: For divorce by mutual consent, there is a composite 18-month separation—one year under Section 13B(1) plus six months under Section 13B(2) (cooling-off), as given in the provided rule summary.

The Constitution Bench held that a final order of the Supreme Court cannot normally be attacked by an aggrieved person after dismissal of review. Yet, to serve substantive justice, the Court created a curative petition as an exceptional remedy.

• Curative petition is for rare cases: party not heard; or a judge failed to disclose a relevant link; or other grave injustice.
• On matrimonial relief, this summary reflects the provided brief: decree of divorce by mutual consent was passed, and the decree may issue even if one party withdraws consent before passing.

1. Finality + Justice: Supreme Court judgments are final, but a curative petition is allowed to fix a gross miscarriage of justice.
2. Grounds for Curative: Lack of hearing, judicial bias or non-disclosure, or other glaring wrongs.
3. Mutual Consent Divorce: Based on the summary given, the decree can be granted even after a party’s withdrawal before decree.

This case teaches two strong lessons. First, the legal system needs finality for certainty. Second, the system must keep a tiny door open for justice. The curative petition is that door.

• Curative petition = last resort after review dismissal.
• Very limited grounds: not-heard, non-disclosure/bias, grave injustice.
• Section 13B needs a composite separation of 18 months.
• Summary provided says decree may pass even after withdrawal of consent.

Mnemonic: “C-U-R-E” — Curative door, Ultra-rare, Review over, Exceptional injustice.

1. Spot: Final SC order + review failed.
2. Check: Not heard / bias / glaring wrong.
3. Apply: Curative petition as last remedy.

Issue

Is there any relief after the Supreme Court’s final judgment and review dismissal? What about withdrawal of consent in mutual consent divorce?

Rule

Finality of SC decisions; Curative petition in rare cases; Section 13B requires 18-month composite separation.

Application

To stop grave injustice, the Court permits a curative petition under strict conditions. On divorce, this summary reflects that decree issued despite withdrawal.

Conclusion

Supreme Court is final, but justice survives through the limited curative route; mutual consent divorce decree granted per the provided summary.

Curative Petition

A final, exceptional petition to correct grave injustice after review is dismissed.

Review Petition

A request to the same court to review its judgment for an apparent error.

Section 13B, HMA

Provision for divorce by mutual consent, with cooling-off and separation period.