IMPORTANT POINT
Wedding reception cannot be called as a part of marriage ritual.

JUDGMENT

RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith and by consent of both the counsel, taken up for final hearing.

2. This writ petition challenges judgment and order dated 21 April, 2022 passed by the Family Court, Mumbai thereby rejecting the application filed by the petitioner (wife) and holding that the Family Court, Mumbai has jurisdiction to entertain and decide the Divorce Petition filed by Husband.

3. The petitioner (wife) and respondent (husband) got married according to Hindu Vedic Rites and Rituals on 7 June, 2015 at Jodhpur, Rajasthan. After their marriage at Jodhpur, there was a wedding reception in a Hotel, at Grant Road, Mumbai on 11 June, 2015.

4. Thereafter, the petitioner (wife) and respondent (husband) stayed in Mumbai in the parents’ house of the husband. On 15 June, 2015, the husband left for U.S.A. as even before the marriage he was residing in U.S.A. and working in U.S.A. Soon thereafter, even the wife on 1 August, 2015 left for U.S.A. and started residing with the husband and was also working in U.S.A.

5. Admittedly, on 15 October, 2019 due to matrimonial issues arising out of the wedlock, the wife and the husband separated when they were residing in U.S.A.

6. On 6 August 2020, the husband filed a divorce petition in Family Court at Bandra under Section 13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, on the ground of cruelty. The said petition was a notarized at U.S.A. However, as the Department of the Family Court Mumbai does not permit filing of notarized document from a foreign country, the husband filed a notarized divorce petition through a power of attorney holder (Attorney being his father).

7. Soon thereafter on 10 December, 2020, the wife filed a divorce petition in U.S.A. The said divorce petition is pending for hearing before the U.S.A. Court.

8. The wife subsequently filed application (Ex.16) on 30 August, 2021 challenging the maintainability of the divorce petition filed by the husband before the Family Court, Bandra, Mumbai. The said application Exhibit - 16 stated that none of the grounds as mentioned under Section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act were attracted. Therefore, the Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai has no jurisdiction to entertain the divorce petition in Mumbai.

9. The husband afterwards filed his reply to the application filed by the petitioner wife.

10. The Family Court, Bandra thereafter heard both the parties and by its judgment and order dated 21 April, 2022 rejected the application Exhibit - 16 filed by the wife. The present writ petition is filed by the wife challenging the impugned order dated 21 April, 2022 filed by the wife.

Submissions :

11. Ms.Gayatri Gokhale appearing on behalf of the petitioner (wife) made her submissions :-

(i) Ms.Gokhale submitted that both the husband and wife are working and residing at U.S.A. Admittedly all the wedding rituals were held at Jodhpur, Rajasthan. In Mumbai there was only a reception which cannot be termed as any kind of rituals. The parties only for a brief period stayed in Mumbai, in the house of the parents of the husband and thereafter the husband left for U.S.A. on 15 June, 2015 and soon thereafter on 1 August, 2015 the wife left for U.S.A. Both the husband and wife stayed together in U.S.A. from August 2015 till 15 October, 2019 for a period approximately around four years. And from 15 October, 2019 both of them are staying separately. Therefore, the last residence of both the husband and wife was in U.S.A. Therefore, under the provisions of Section 19 (iii) the Family Court at Mumbai will have no jurisdiction to try and entertain the divorce petition filed by the husband.

(ii) Ms.Gokhale submitted that even before marriage, the husband was staying in U.S.A. and working in U.S.A. from the year 2007. She submitted that both the husband and wife have applied for “Green Card”. She submitted that both the husband and wife have no intention to come back to India and reside in India.

(iii) Ms.Gokhale submitted that even the divorce petition ha