Advocates:
['MANOJ PARANJPE', '', 'VAIBHAV A GOVERDHAN', 'Prasoon Agrawal', 'Bharat Sharma', 'vinod kumar pandey', 'Amit Soni', 'ANSHUL TIWARI', 'SHUBHANK TIWARI', 'VAISHALI MAHILONG']

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

W.P.(227) No.161 of 2021

•

Kanwaljeet Singh Hura, S/o Shri Madan Singh Hura, Aged About 41

Years R/o. Gurudwara Road, Takhatpur, Tehsil Takhatpur, District

Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

---- Petitioner

Versus

•

Smt. Neeraj Kaur, W/o Shri Kanwaljeet Singh Hura, Aged About 39

Years R/o. 583A, Aadarsh Nagar, Nayagaon, Mohali, Tehsil And District

Mohali - 160103 Panjab

At Present R/o. 5039, Hamilton Wolf Road, Apartment No. 1103, San

Antonio Texas - 78229 U.S.A.

---- Respondent

For Petitioner

:

Mr. Manoj Paranjpe with Mr. Amit Soni,

Advocates.

Hon'ble Shri Justice

Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant

Order on Board

12/03/2021

1. This petition has been brought seeking indulgence of this Court under

Article 227 Constitution of India against the order dated 02.02.2021

passed by the learned Family Court, Bilaspur, C.G.

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, that the

petitioner and the respondent both are married to each other and both of

them earlier used to reside in Texas, USA. The petitioner has come back

to India, while the respondent is continuing to reside in USA, however,

her Visa is going to expire in July 2021. Due to the differences between

the applicant and the respondent, the respondent filed a divorce petition

in the Court of USA in Bexar County, Texas, against this petitioner under

the law prevailing in Texas in USA. The petitioner, on coming to know

-2-

about this proceeding, filed the Civil Suit before the learned Family

Court praying for relief of declaration and permanent injunction, in which

ad-interim injunction was sought against the respondent for not

proceeding against the applicant in the foreign Court.

3. Relying on the judgment of Supreme Court in Y. Narasimha Rao and

ors Vs. Y. Venkata Lakshmi and anr. reported in (1991) 3 SCC 451

and in the case of Madhavendra L. Bhatnagar Vs. Bhavna Lall

reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 41, it is submitted that the Family

Court in India has jurisdiction to grant temporary injunction as prayed

for.

4. It is further submitted that the learned Family Court has refused to

entertain the Civil Suit filed by the petitioner and passed impugned

order holding that the Family Court has no jurisdiction to hear on this

Civil Suit.

5. It is again submitted that in view of the case cited hereinabove. The

learned Family Court has the jurisdiction and power to grant relief to the

petitioner, hence, this petition may be admitted for hearing and interim

relief be granted to the petitioner.

6. Considered on the submissions and the facts in the present case. The

petitioner and the respondent both are Indian citizens. Their marriage

was performed on 28.03.2010 in Gurudwara, according to Hindu

Customary rights, therefore, the law that is applicable with respect to the

dispute regarding this marriage is the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Any

foreign Court does not recognise Indian laws and for the reason that the

parties are governed by the Indian law, there appears to be a case in

favour of this petitioner.

7. It has been observed by the Supreme Court in Paragraph 8 of Y.

Narasimha Rao and ors Vs. Y. Venkata Lakshmi and anr. (Supra):-

“8.Under Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908

(hereinafter referred to as the “Code''), a foreign judgment is not

conclusive as to any matter thereby directly adjudicated upon

between the parties if (a) it has not been pronounced by a Court

of competent jurisdiction; (b) it has not been given on the merits

of the case; (c) it is founded on an incorrect view of international

law or a refusal to recognize the law of India in cases in which

such law is applicable; (d) the proceedings are opposed to

natural justice, (e) it is obtained by fraud, (f) it sustains a claim

founded on a breach of any law in force in India.”

8. Further, in the case of Madhavendra L. Bhatnagar Vs. Bhavna Lall

(Supra), the Supreme Court