Sow. Sharda Sharad Sahane vs Sharad Uttamrao Sahane

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(Bom) 462

SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE
Sow. Sharda Sharad Sahane – Appellant
Versus
Sharad Uttamrao Sahane – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Mahesh L. Muthal, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Sanjay D. Hiwrekar, Adv.

Judgement Key Points

What is the effect of a final decree of divorce on the right to remarry under Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act? What is the status of an ex-parte decree of divorce versus a contested decree in the context of Section 15 and remarriage? Whether a remarriage of the respondent after the decree renders an appeal infructuous even if the appellant files a delay condonation application

What is the effect of a final decree of divorce on the right to remarry under Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act?

What is the status of an ex-parte decree of divorce versus a contested decree in the context of Section 15 and remarriage?

Whether a remarriage of the respondent after the decree renders an appeal infructuous even if the appellant files a delay condonation application

JUDGMENT :

Sandipkumar C. More, J.

1. By consent of the learned counsel of the rival parties, heard finally at admission stage.

2. The present appellant/wife has preferred this second appeal against the judgment and order dated 15/09/2021 passed by the learned District Judge-10, Aurangabad (hereinafter referred to as 'the learned first appellate court') in Civil Miscellaneous Application No.168 of 2020, whereby the application filed by the present appellant/wife for condonation of delay of 166 days in challenging the impugned order dated 29/08/2019 passed by the learned trial court i.e. 12th Joint Civil Judge (Senior Division), Aurangabad, whereby marriage between the present appellant and respondent solemnized on 02/04/2013 has been dissolved by way of decree of divorce.

3. Background facts are as under :

The marriage between the appellant/wife and respondent/husband had solemnized on 02/04/2013 and they are having one girl child out of the said wedlock. However, a dispute arose between them after few days of the marriage resulting into filing of Hindu Marriage Petition No.3 of 2016 by the respondent/husband on 16/12/2015 before the learned trial court for getting decree of divorce. Th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis

[No cases identified as bad law. None of the case laws contain keywords or phrases indicating they have been overruled, reversed, abrogated, or otherwise treated as bad law, such as "overruled," "reversed," or similar explicit negative treatments.]

[The following cases show no explicit judicial treatment patterns (e.g., followed, distinguished, criticized, questioned, overruled, reversed, or abrogated) based on the provided descriptions. Each consists solely of holdings or principles without reference to how subsequent decisions have treated them:]

Zile Singh vs Rajwanti - 2025 0 Supreme(P&H) 338: Description focuses on procedural requirements for appeals and proof in marriage claims ("Delay in appeals must be satisfactorily explained; insufficient proof of karewa marriage leads to dismissal of property claims"). No treatment keywords present.

Rakhi vs Krishnakumar - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2625: Description addresses validity of pre-divorce judgment marriages and impermissibility of conflicting amendments ("A marriage contracted before the effective date of the divorce judgment is valid and amendments creating conflicting claims are impermissible"). No treatment keywords present.

Sohan Kumar Sankhala vs Laxmi Parewa - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 11793: Description covers recall of dismissal orders for absent parties ("A party absent during proceedings cannot recall a dismiss order without demonstrating a fresh cause of action"). No treatment keywords present.

Krishnaveni Rai VS Pankaj Rai - 2020 0 Supreme(SC) 439: Description holds that certain marriages during appeal pendency are not void ab initio ("A marriage contracted during the pendency of an appeal from a decree of divorce is not ab initio void, especially when the appeal is filed after the expiry of the period of limitation. The legislative intent was not to render a valid marriage void on the filing of a belated appeal"). No treatment keywords present.

ANURAG MITTAL VS SHAILY MISHRA MITTAL - 2019 2 Supreme 129: Description covers decree status, marriage validity under Section 15, appeal withdrawal, and interpretation principles ("Decree of divorce is a judgment in rem. A marriage in contravention of the proviso to Section 15 is not void. Restriction placed on a second marriage in Section 15 till the dismissal of an appeal would not apply to a case where parties have settled and decided not to pursue the appeal. Withdrawal of a suit or application is complete with filing the application/suit for withdrawal – Order of the court is not necessary. Order of the court is necessary only where plaintiff seeks liberty to institute a fresh suit. Beneficial legislation requires purposive interpretation"). No treatment keywords present.

[No cases. All cases have clear absence of treatment indicators, categorized accordingly above with explanations based on lack of keywords or phrases signaling judicial treatment.]