Dismissed¶16

Mahima Dudeja v. Deepanshu Dudeja

Allahabad HC21 Apr 2026A227/1949/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Article 227; expeditious disposal; direction to Family Court; Principal Judge Family Court Gonda; Case No. 808 of 2024; Section 13 Hindu Marriage Act; divorce petition; delay in proceedings; petitioner's absence on hearing dates; non-cooperation; prayer misconceived; no justifiable ground; petition dismissed; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; Chandra Dhari Singh, J.; April 21, 2026.

What did the court decide?

From a careful perusal of the order sheet, the petitioner herself had remained absent on several dates fixed before the court below, thereby contributing to the delay in the progress of the case. ¶11

Mahima Dudeja vs Deepanshu Dudeja — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1949 of 2026

¶3

Mahima Dudeja

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

	Versus
Deepanshu Dudeja	.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Rishi Kumar Tripathi, Manish Barnwal
Counsel for Respondent(s)	:

¶6

Court No. - 24

¶7

HON'BLE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J.

¶8

The instant petition has been filed seeking the following main relief:-

¶9

"Issue an order or direction to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Gonda to decide Case No. 808 of 2024 (Mahima Dudeja versus Deepanshu Dudeja) under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, within stipulated time as fixed by this Hon'ble Court, in the interest of justice."

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Dinesh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent. The Court has also perused the material brought on record, including the order sheet of the court below.

¶11

From a careful perusal of the order sheet, it is evident that the petitioner herself has remained absent on several dates fixed before the court below, thereby contributing to the delay in the progress of the case.

¶12

The prayer for expeditious disposal of the case, in the facts and circumstances of the present matter, appears to be misconceived, particularly when the petitioner herself has failed to cooperate with the proceedings before the court below.

¶13

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court does not find any justifiable ground to issue any direction to the court below for expeditious disposal of the case.

¶14

A227 No. 1949 of 2026

¶15

¶16