IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK JAIN

th

ON THE 15 OF DECEMBER, 2025 MISC. PETITION No. 3624 of 2025 PRIYANKA Versus DEEPAK Appearance:

Shri Ghanshyam Barman - Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Yash Tiwari - Advocate for the respondent.

ORDER The present petition has been filed by the petitioner wife, challenging the order passed by the Family Court in permitting amendment of divorce petition seeking insertion of ground of divorce in terms of Section 13(1) (ib), i.e. on the ground of desertion.

2. The necessary undisputed facts in brief for the purpose of disposal of present petition are that the parties have not been cohabiting each other since 06.05.2021 and initially the divorce petition was filed on the ground of cruelty by the respondent husband before the Civil Court at Varaseoni, District Balaghat on 22.06.2021. The said suit was thereafter transferred to the Family Court and it was registered in the Family Court on 11.09.2023. In this manner, the suit was initially registered before the Civil Court on

22.06.2022.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner-wife that initially the plaint was filed seeking divorce only on the ground of cruelty and now an application for amendment in the plaint has been filed in January, 2025 seeking insertion of additional ground of desertion. It is argued that as per Section 13(1)(ib) of Act of 1955. The requisite precondition is desertion for a continuous period of not less than 2 years immediately preceding presentation of petition and therefore, the date of presentation of petition being 22.06.2022, therefore, such a relief could not have been inserted in the plaint by the respondent husband, because the parties have cohabited with each other up to 06.05.2021 and the suit on the basis of desertion could only be filed on or after 06.05.2023, but since the present suit was filed on 22.06.2022, therefore, this ground could not have been inserted in the divorce petition by way of amendment.

4 . Per contra, it is vehemently argued by learned counsel for the respondent husband that the respondent husband first sought to withdraw the suit under Order 23 Rule 1 CPC on the ground that he wishes to file a fresh petition for divorce with all the grounds, but the Family Court did not permit withdrawal. It is contended that the petitioner can still bring a fresh suit on the ground of desertion, but that would lead to multiplicity of proceedings and in case a fresh suit is brought by the respondent husband, then in the interest of justice that would be tried with the present suit and be consolidated with the present suit and therefore, allowing the present amendment is only with a view to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and to ensure speedy justice to the parties.

5. Heard.

6. In the present case, it is not in dispute that on the date of filing of amendment application, i.e. 11.01.2025, the period of 2 years was over during which the parties had not cohabited with each other. But the question that arises is that on the date of initial filing of divorce petition i.e. 22.06.2022, the said period of 2 years was not over and the amendment has been contested by counsel for the petitioner wife on the ground that if the amendment is allowed, then it would relate back to the date of divorce petition and the date of divorce petition being within less than 2 years of last cohabitation or alleged desertion, then such amendment could not be allowed.

7. A peculiar situation is arising in the present case wherein the respondent-husband had earlier sought to withdraw the divorce petition with liberty to file fresh petition by including the ground of desertion, but the Family Court then disallowed withdrawal of the divorce petition. Now the respondent husband can file a fresh suit on the ground of desertion, but that would only multiply the proceedings, and nothing less.

8. On the date of filing of amendment application, the period of 2 years was admittedly over,