ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI)

1. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant-husband challenging the judgment and decree dated 10.01.2019 passed by the Family Court in the Family Suit No.08 of 2017, by which, the learned Family Court allowed the suit filed by the respondent-wife for divorce and dissolved the marriage. It emerges from the record that the marriage between the parties was solemnized in the year 2001, and out of the said wedlock, a daughter was born, namely, Chitra who is, at present, eighteen years of age and is studying in the first year of college.

1.1 It appears that over a period of time, matrimonial disputes arose between the appellant and the respondent and, therefore, the respondent-wife approached the Family Court by filing Family Suit No.08 of 2017, seeking a decree for dissolution of marriage under section 13(1) (a) of the Hindu Marriage Act. The learned Family Court, after bi-partie hearing, vide its order dated 10.01.2019, allowed the suit and passed a decree for dissolution of the marriage in favour of the respondent-wife. The learned Judge also awarded a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- in favour of the respondent-wife and another sum of Rs.10,00,000/- to the daughter, aggregating to Rs.20,00,000/- by way of permanent alimony towards their maintenance. The said amount was directed to be deposited before the Trial Court.

1.2 Being aggrieved, the appellant-husband has come up with this appeal. The appellant-husband has also filed an application, seeking stay of the operation, implementation and execution of the judgment and decree dated 10.01.2019 passed by the Family Court, and a Coordinate Bench of this Court, on 19.08.2019, passed the following order;

“Though Notice is served to respondent none has appeared. Hence Rule.

[1] The present application is filed by the applicant for stay of the operation, implementation and execution of judgment and decree dated 10.1.2019 of Divorce passed by learned Family Court Aravalli, Modasa in Family Suit No. 8/2017.

[2] Heard Mr. Ashish Dagli, learned advocate for the applicant. Though notice to the respondent has been duly served, no one has appeared for respondent.

[3] This Court has come across the following judgments wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has dealt with Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

In a decision in case of Anurag Mittal v. Shaily Mishra Mittal, reported in (2018) 9 SCC 691, the Supreme Court has dealt with Section

15 as follows:

“27. Section 15 of the Act provides that it shall be lawful for either party to marry again after dissolution of a marriage if there is no right of appeal against the decree. A second marriage by either party shall be lawful only after dismissal of an appeal against the decree of divorce, if filed. If there is no right of appeal, the decree of divorce remains final and that either party to the marriage is free to marry again. In case an appeal is presented, any marriage before dismissal of the appeal shall not be lawful. The object of the provision is to provide protection to the person who has filed an appeal against the decree of dissolution of marriage and to ensure that the said appeal is not frustrated. The purpose of Section 15 of the Act is to avert complications that would arise due to a second marriage during the pendency of the appeal, in case the decree of dissolution of marriage is reversed. The protection that is afforded by Section 15 is primarily to a person who is contesting the decree of divorce.

In a decision in case of Prakash Chand Sharma v.

Vimlesh, reported in 1995 4 SCC 642, the Supreme Court has held that:

4. However, Mr. Pramod Swarup, the learned counsel for the appellanthusband, vehemently submitted that having regard to the fact that both the parties have drifted from married lief the marriage must be taken as irretrievably broken, more so because the husband has remarried and has a child. We do not thing that in the facts and circumstances of the case such a view can be ta