IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
R.D.DHANUKA, M.M.SATHAYE, JJ.
Akash Kanwarlal Kamal – Appellant
Versus
Himani Akash Kamal – Respondent
Interim Application No.10375 of 2022 in Family Court Appeal No.173 of 2019
Decided on : 27-03-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of application in matrimonial dispute. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. marital status impact on appeal proceedings. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. respondent's opposition based on statutory grounds. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. chronology of events regarding appeal and marriage. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. legal standards of remarriage under hindu marriage act. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 6. assessment of compliance with appeal timelines. (Para 16 , 17) |
| 7. effect of second marriage on pending appeal. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 8. interim arguments and their relevance. (Para 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 9. court's final orders regarding appeal. (Para 29 , 30) |
ORDER :
M.M.Sathaye, J. - This Interim Application is a classic example of increasing tendency amongst the litigants to try to overreach the provisions of Law by creating a situation, which is difficult to reverse, thereby making pending proceedings infructuous. In the present case, such effort is made by a wife in a matrimonial dispute arising out of divorce proceedings.
2. This is an application filed by Applicant-wife (Respondent in Appeal) praying for dismissal of Appeal (FCA No.173/2019) on account of her second marriage. An alternative prayer is made to vacate the interim order passed by this Court dated 11.10.2019 in IA No.1/2019 and for expeditious hearing of the appeal.
3. It is the case of the Applicant-Wife that marriage between the Applicant and Respondent was solemnized on 09.08.2006 as per Hindu rites and rituals. The parties were blessed with a son named Arjun, who was born on 17.05.2008. Due to cruel treatment by Respondent-husband, the Applicant was forced to leave the matrimonial house and she filed petition for divorce and for relief of custody of child. On 12.07.2019, the Family Court No.5, Mumbai partly allowed the Applicant's claim and marriage between the Applicant and Respondent was dissolved by decree of divorce with effect from the date of the decree, giving her permanent custody of child Arjun. The Respondent Husband was permitted to have access on week-ends.
4. It is submitted by the Applicant Wife that on 06.10.2019 (within 90 days from the date of decree), she remarried to one Pradip Mannadiar, a German national of Indian origin and at the time of that marriage, she was not aware of the present Family Court Appeal filed by the Respondent-husband. It is further submitted that on 09.10.2019, the papers and proceedings of present Family Court Appeal came to be served on the Applicant and for the first time, she got the knowledge of pendency of the present Appeal. It is further submitted that on 11.10.2019, when this Family Court Appeal was listed in this Court, the Applicant disclosed to the Court that she has already remarried, when an order of interim stay is passed by this Court. It is submitted orally before us that on that day, no documentary evidence was produced by Applicant Wife in support of her claim of being already re-married and therefore interim stay has been granted by way of abundant precaution.
5. The Applicant contends that she has contracted second marriage when she had no knowledge of the present Appeal and after the second marriage and her cohabitation with her second husband, no purpose would be served in keeping the present Family Court Appeal pending. It is contended that the marriage between the Applicant and Respondent has been broken irretrievably and the same is dead from 2013 and since then the parties have not cohabited. On these grounds, the Applicant prays that the present Family Court Appeal be dismissed or the interim order dated 11.10.2019 granting stay to the dissolution of marriage, be vacated and the appeal be heard expeditiously.
6. The Respondent-husband (original Appellant) has filed a reply and has opposed this interim application. It is contended by the Respondent-husband that the Applicant had remarried without waiting for the statutory period of Appeal, as required under Section 15 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT , 1956. It is submitted t
The court established that a decree of divorce, whether contested or ex-parte, allows either party to remarry once the appeal period has expired, as per Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Remarriage during the appeal period does not invalidate the marriage but is subject to the outcome of the appeal against the divorce decree.
(1) Divorce – Consent of parties is not necessary to declare a marriage dissolved – A dead marriage must be given a decent quietus.(2) Matrimonial Proceedings – Bar of limitation – Word ‘proceedings’....
Exparte decree – Setting aside – Every conclusion must be well supported by adequate reasons and if issue is arising that case has not been properly dealt with, same would be relevant circumstance fo....
A marriage is void if one party has a living spouse, and customary divorce must be proven to be legally recognized.
(1) No application for amendment shall be allowed after trial has commenced unless court comes to conclusion that in spite of due diligence party could not have raised matter before commencement of t....
An appeal against a decree of divorce by mutual consent is not maintainable if the consent is claimed to be obtained through fraud or misrepresentation.
The court emphasized the necessity of mutual consent and the consideration of subsequent developments in divorce proceedings under the Hindu Marriage Act.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.