Anti-Suit Injunction Against UK Divorce Proceedings Cannot Rest on Speculation That a Future Decree Will Be Unenforceable in India: Supreme Court

Case Name: Mihir Prakash Bajoria v. Vidushi Jain Bajoria

Date of Judgment: 22 September 2026

Citation: 2026 INSC 1034; Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 15849 of 2026.

Bench: Justice S.V.N. Bhatti and Justice N.V. Anjaria.

Held: An Indian court may restrain a party from pursuing proceedings before a foreign court, but an anti-suit injunction must be granted sparingly, with regard to the appropriate forum, the interests of justice and comity between courts. The possibility that a future foreign divorce decree may not be recognised in India is an insufficient basis to stop proceedings that are still pending. In this case, the parties’ prolonged matrimonial residence and other substantial connections with the UK supported the High Court’s decision to vacate the injunction.

Summary: The parties married in Kolkata under Hindu customs but lived together for substantial periods in London. The husband filed a divorce suit in India, while the wife commenced divorce proceedings before a UK Family Court. The husband then obtained an interim order from an Alipore court restraining her from continuing the UK proceedings. He argued, among other things, that a UK divorce based on irretrievable breakdown of marriage might not be enforceable in India. The Calcutta High Court set aside the injunction. The Supreme Court held that the trial court had acted prematurely: the UK proceedings and questions concerning that court’s jurisdiction were still live, and the enforceability of any eventual decree could be addressed if and when necessary.

Decision: The Supreme Court dismissed the husband’s appeal and upheld the Calcutta High Court’s order vacating the anti-suit injunction. It expressly left the parties free to challenge any further or final UK orders before a competent forum in accordance with law, without expressing an opinion on those orders.