$~20

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ MAT.APP.(F.C.) 267/2025

SNEHA AHUJA .....Appellant

Through: Mr. Sudhanshu Batra, Sr. Adv. with

Mr. Prashant Mehta, Mr. Charanpreet Singh and Mr. Akshat Chawla, Advs.

versus

RAVEEN AHUJA .....Respondent

Through: Mr. Prabhjit Jauhar, Ms. Shreya

Narayan and Mr. Chahat Raghav,

Advocates. CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK CHAUDHARY

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN

O R D E R

% 15.01.2026

CAV 272/2025

1. Mr. Prabhjit Jauhar, the learned counsel, enters appearance on behalf of

the respondent/caveator.

2. In view of his appearance, the caveat stands discharged.

MAT.APP.(F.C.) 267/2025, CM APPL. 44226/2025 & CM APPL.

66642/2025

3. The present appeal has been filed under Section 19 of the Family Court Act, 1984, assailing the Judgement dated 28.05.2025 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court-01, South-East District, Saket Courts, Delhi, in HMA No. 81/2023 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘impugned judgment'), whereby the

marriage between the parties has been dissolved by way of decree of divorce being granted in the favour of respondent.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

5. Admit.

6. List in due course.

CM APPL. 44225/2025 (stay

7. The present application has been filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC seeking grant of ad-interim ex-parte stay on the operation of the impugned judgment during the pendency of the present appeal.

8. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that on the basis of the order impugned in the present appeal, in other proceedings between the parties, treating the marriage to have broken and petitioner, no more being wife of the respondent, orders with regard to her residence and other rights are being considered. In case, such orders are passed before the present appeal is heard on merit and decided, the same would cause irreparable injury to the appellant and such situation would arise which cannot be reverted back.

9. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposes the present application, submitting that the impugned judgment is well reasoned, passed on the sound merits and does not warrant any interference by this Court.

10. Insofar as the merits of the impugned judgement are concerned, the same cannot be gone into by us, at this stage, and can only be examined at the time of hearing of the appeal.

11. It is pertinent to note that during the pendency of the appeal, the parties have to maintain a situation where their respective rights are not affected in a manner that they cannot be restored upon final adjudication of the present appeal.

12. In the conspectus of the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that the appellant has made a prima facie case for grant of stay on the operation of the impugned judgment.

13. Accordingly, the operation of the impugned judgment shall remain stayed during the pendency of the present appeal.

14. The present application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

15. Copy of this order be given dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.

VIVEK CHAUDHARY, J SHAIL JAIN, J JANUARY 15, 2026 bs/nc