SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Guj) 661

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SANGEETA K. VISHEN, NISHA M. THAKORE, JJ.
Milin Vinodbhai Gandhi – Appellant
Versus
Minal W/o Milin Vinodbhai Gandhi And D/o Niranjanbhai Manuprasad Suthar – Respondent
R/First Appeal No. 1282 of 2021
Decided on : 26-04-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : CHIRAG A PRAJAPATI
For the Respondent: MR MB RANA

IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to convert a petition under Section 13(i)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act to a joint petition for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B, based on the parties' final amicable settlement.

Headnote:

Cruelty - Hindu Marriage Act - Section 13(i)(i-a) - 13B - 1955 - The court discussed the provisions of Section 13(i)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and converted the original petition under Section 13(i)(i-a) to a joint petition for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B. The court also incorporated the terms and conditions of the agreement of settlement as part of the petition, and directed the Family Court to expeditiously dispose of the proceedings.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant-husband filed a petition under Section 13(i)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 alleging cruelty by the respondent-wife. The Family Court rejected the petition, and the appellant appealed. During the pendency of the appeal, the parties reached a final amicable settlement and mutually agreed not to continue their marriage.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the parties voluntarily entered into a final amicable settlement and expressed their wish not to continue their marriage. The court accepted the prayer to convert the original petition under Section 13(i)(i-a) to a joint petition for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B, incorporating the terms and conditions of the settlement as part of the petition.

Issues: The issues involved the rejection of the petition for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty under Section 13(i)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, and the subsequent agreement for a final amicable settlement between the parties.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the parties' mutual agreement to dissolve their marriage by mutual consent, leading to the conversion of the original petition under Section 13(i)(i-a) to a joint petition for divorce under Section 13B. The court emphasized the importance of adhering to the terms and conditions of the settlement as agreed upon.

Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal by quashing and setting aside the judgment and order of the Family Court, and directed the Family Court to convert the original petition under Section 13(i)(i-a) to a joint petition for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B, incorporating the terms and conditions of the settlement as part of the petition. The Family Court was further directed to expeditiously dispose of the proceedings, preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of recording of the parties' mutual consent.

JUDGMENT :

NISHA M. THAKORE, J.

1. This appeal under section 19 of the Family Courts Act arises out of the judgment and order dated 07.02.2020 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Godhra in Family Suit No.19 of 2016 rejecting the petition filed by the present appellant- husband under Section 13(i)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

2. The brief facts as pleaded by the original applicant - husband before the Family Court are in nutshell reproduced herein under.

2.1. The marriage between the appellant and the respondent was solemnized on 08.12.2001 as per the Hindu rites and rituals in presence of their relatives. Since then they became the husband and wife and were initially living happily together. One daughter viz. Hemanya was born out of the said wedlock on 4.11.2004. It is further stated that the respondent- wife was working as data entry operator at Civil Hospital, Godhra where she came in contact with a co-employee with whom she developed a relationship. Later on the respondent having realized about her mistake and though the original petitioner being aware about such fact, had mutually compromised taking into consideration the future of their daughter. It is further stated that in 2015 the respondent once again had an affair with one person. With such facts, the original petitioner husband had alleged cruelty.

2.2. It is further contended that on 19.1.2016 the petitioner had left his house and had started living with his cousin. It was further alleged that the respondent had harassed the husband by threatening him to file a case against him and his family members and had also threatened to commit suicide. The reference was also made about filing of civil suit by the mother of the original petitioner. The efforts were made by the family members for reconciliation, however, the respondent wife had continued to treat the petitioner with cruelty and it was not possible for them to live as husband and wife. By raising aforesaid contentions, the Family Suit was registered on 18.04.2016 with the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Godhra as Family Suit No.19 of 2016.

2.3. The parties have participated in the trial and the evidence was led by the respective parties. The learned Judge upon appreciation of the evidence and the various decisions relied upon, arrived at a conclusion that the petitioner had not proved his case with reliable, cogent and impeachable evidence regarding the mental cruelty administered by his wife, living adulterous or illicit relations with her paramour or any other persons. Thus, the learned Judge has rejected the petition by the impugned. Aggrieved by the said order of the learned Judge, Family Court, the original petitioner – appellant husband herein has approached this Court by filing present appeal under Section 19 of the Family Court Act read with Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

3. Noticing the grounds raised in the appeal, this Court by order dated 7.6.2021 upon hearing the learned advocate for the appellant- husband had admitted the appeal. The notice of admission of appeal has been duly served upon the respondent wife, who is represented by the learned counsel.

4. The matter was notified for final hearing on 24.04.2024. The matter was jointly mentioned by the learned advocate Mr. Chirag Prajapati for the appellant and Mr. M.B.Rana, learned advocate for the respondent. It was jointly submitted by the learned advocates that parties are present in person and had reported that pending this appeal, the parties have arrived at a final amicable settlement, whereby, they have mutually agreed not to continue their marriage life ahead. In such circumstances, the respondent wife has expressed her no objection to grant the prayers urged in the present appeal by quashing and setting aside the impugned judgment and order dated 07.02.2020 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court refusing the petition for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty. Mr. Rana, learned advocate for the respondent w

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon Back to top