The court emphasized that the issue of territorial jurisdiction is a mixed question of law and facts and cannot be decided in a piecemeal manner.

JUDGEMENT

1. This judgment shall decide the present petition filed by the petitioner invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking the following prayers:

“a.

Allow the instant petition and set aside the order dated 02.11.2023 passed in CS no. 4 of 2021 by the hon'ble Judge, Family Court, Patiala House Court and pass a judgment based on the admission of plaintiff/ respondent herein made on 14.03.2023 that she is not a resident on Delhi since 28.09.2019, and the trial court does not have territorial jurisdiction to try CS No.4 of 2021, b.

Any further order in the interest of justice.”

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the respondent, who was married to the petitioner as per the Hindu rites and ceremonies on 22.01.2013 Page 2 of 5 at Agra, Uttar Pradesh, has filed a civil suit for declaration to set aside the ex-parte decree of divorce in case No.18 DR1 00137 1B dated 28.06.2018 passed by the First Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada in and for Carson City (USA).

3. The respondent filed the suit before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Patiala House Court Complex, New Delhi1, claiming that she is a resident of H.No.C-8/7, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi. The main grievance of the petitioner/husband is that the respondent/ex- wife is a permanent resident of Bangalore and she has been even gainfully employed in Bangalore, and yet the suit has been filed before the Family Court at Patiala House Court, New Delhi, which lacks territorial jurisdiction.

4. Having heard the learned counsels for the parties and on perusal of the record, I find that the present petition is grossly misconceived and tantamount to delaying the outcome of the proceedings before the Family Court concerned. The plea of the petitioner was earlier considered by the Family Court vide order dated 06.08.2022 and it was categorically observed that the jurisdiction of the court is not to be guided by Section 192 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, but by 1 Family Court 2 19. Court to which petition shall be presented.- Every petition under this Act shall be presented to the district court within the local limits of whose ordinary original civil jurisdiction— (i) the marriage was solemnised, or (ii) the respondent, at the time of the presentation of the petition, resides, or (iii) the parties to the marriage last resided together, or (iiia) in case the wife is the petitioner, where she is residing on the date of presentation of the petition, or (iv) the petitioner is residing at the time of the presentation of the petition, in a case where the respondent is, at that time, residing outside the territories to which this Act extends, or has not Page 3 of 5 Section 203 of the Civil Procedure Code, 19084 and accordingly, his application under Order VII Rule 10 of the CPC was dismissed.

5. The said order was not challenged and evidently, the evidence of the ex-wife has been recorded during the proceedings/Trial after framing of the issues. However, the petitioner again moved an application under Order XII Rule 6 of the CPC so as to seek judgment on admission with regard to his objections to the territorial jurisdiction of the court, the admission of which as per him, is coming out in the cross-examination of the respondent/plaintiff. It would be expedient to reproduce the impugned order dated 02.11.2023 passed by the learned Family Court, which reads as under:

“02.11.2023 Present:

Sh. Hari Om Sharan Singh, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner. Sh. Salman Hashmi, Ld. Counsel for the respondent with respondent in person.

Application under Order 8 Rule 1A CPC is pending disposal whereby respondent is willing to place on record documents comprising 99 pages.

3 20. Other suits to be instituted where defendants reside or cause of action arises.—Subject to the limitations aforesaid, every suit shall be instituted in a Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction— (a) the defendant, or