Ajay Dubey vs Annapurna

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

DELHI HIGH COURT
VIPIN SANGHI, JASMEET SINGH
Ajay Dubey – Appellant
Versus
Annapurna – Respondent

Table of Content
1. jurisdiction of family court. (Para 2 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
2. arguments on jurisdiction objection. (Para 3 , 8 , 9)
3. family court's failure to apply jurisdiction. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 14)
4. territorial jurisdiction rules explained. (Para 13)
5. appeal allowed; orders restored. (Para 15 , 16)

JUDGMENT

Vipin Sanghi, J. (ORAL)--At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant states that the respondent is also present with him during the virtual hearing in his office. She has also appeared.

2. The present appeal is directed against the orders dated 08.10.2020 and 19.11.2020 passed by Ms. Ruby Alka Gupta, learned Single Judge, Family Court, East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in HMA 1701/2020 jointly preferred by the parties under Section 13-b of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT , 1955 to seek Divorce by mutual consent. The impugned orders were passed by the Family Court while dealing with the Second Motion Petition under Section 13B(2). The First Motion Petition under Section 13B(1) had been entertained and allowed by the same Family Court vide order dated 13.12.2019.

3. The two impugned orders read as follows:-

"08.10.2020

File perused.

As per jurisdiction para noted in the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

DELHI HIGH COURTVIPIN SANGHI, JASMEET SINGHAjay Dubey – AppellantVersusAnnapurna – Respondent

DELHI HIGH COURT
VIPIN SANGHI, JASMEET SINGH
Ajay Dubey – Appellant
Versus
Annapurna – Respondent