Allowed

Chandra Shekhar Azad v. Ranjana Kumari

Allahabad HC19 Sept 2024FAPL/229/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Appellant challenged the dismissal of mutual divorce proceedings due to the Respondent's absence in the second motion. The High Court found that the Respondent, now represented, wished to participate due to a communication error regarding the hearing date. The appeal was allowed and the matter remitted for fresh orders.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed; order dated 15.02.2024 set aside; matter remitted to Family Court for fresh hearing and order on 04.10.2024.

Chandra Shekhar Azad vs Ranjana Kumari — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:153144-DB

¶2

Court No. - 39

¶3

Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. - 229 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Chandra Shekhar Azad Respondent :- Ranjana Kumari Counsel for Appellant :- Arun Kumar Yadav,Rajeev Nayan Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Anil Pratap Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J. Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Rajeev Nayan Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Anil Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the respondent.

¶7

Present appeal has been filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 arising from the order dated 15.02.2024 passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No.1, Varanasi in Matrimonial Case No.1919 of 2022 (Chandra Shekhar Azad Vs. Ranjana Kumari) whereby the learned court below has dismissed the proceedings under Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act instituted by the parties to dissolve their marriage.

¶8

Undeniably the agreed amount of permanent alimony Rs.4 lakhs was paid out to the respondent. However, later she could not appear at the stage of second motion petition. In such circumstances, learned court below dismissed the proceedings for want of participation by the respondent.

¶9

In this appeal, upon notice being issued, respondent is represented. Learned counsel for the respondent has received telephonic instructions from the respondent that she could not participate in the proceedings before the learned court below owing to some misunderstanding and/ or mis-communication as to

¶10

the date fixed in the proceedings. He further states, that respondent had instructed him (orally) that she would now participate in the proceedings in terms of the settlement reached.

¶11

In view of such stand taken by the respondent, no useful purpose would be served in keeping this petition pending any further, accordingly the present appeal is allowed . The order dated 15.02.2024 is set aside. The matter is remitted to the learned court below to pass a fresh order after hearing both parties, provided that both the parties may appear before the learned court below on 04.10.2024, on which date appropriate orders may be passed.

¶12

Order Date :- 19.9.2024 A Gautam

¶13

(Donadi Ramesh,J.) (S.D. Singh,J.)

¶14

Digitally signed by :- ADITYA GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Chandra Shekhar Azad v. Ranjana Kumari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandra Shekhar Azad v. Ranjana Kumari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anita Devi vs State of Up and 3 Others

Mukesh Sahu vs Smt Meena Sahu

Shyam Kumar vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Abhishek Arya vs Smt Sunita

Jyoti Singh and 2 Others vs State of Up and 12 Others

Mahesh Kumar vs Smt Vinita