Allowed

Hemant Baliram Malekar v. Mrs. Shubhangi Hemant Malekar

Bombay HC3 Feb 2014FCA/173/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court passed a decree based on consent terms, quashed the impugned judgment and decree dated 25.01.2007, restored Petition No. A-785 of 2002, and permitted amendment to convert it to a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for a divorce decree.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment and decree dated 25.01.2007 quashed and set aside; Petition No. A-785 of 2002 restored; divorce decree passed under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

Hemant Baliram Malekar Vs Mrs. Shubhangi Hemant Malekar — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

skc

¶2

FCA-173-07

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 173 OF 2007 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 213 OF 2009

¶5

Hemant Baliram Malekar vs.

¶6

.. Appellant

¶7

Mrs. Shubhangi Hemant Malekar .. Respondent

¶8

Mr. Y. S. Bhate for Appellant.

¶9

Mr. Sanjay S. Gawade for Respondent.

¶10

CORAM : A. S. OKA & M. S. SONAK, JJ. 3RD FEBRUARY 2014

¶11

P.C. :-

¶12

1] The learned counsel appearing for the Appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent tendered across the bar the Consent Terms duly signed by the Appellant, the Respondent and their respective Advocates. They state that the Appellant and the Respondent admit the correctness of the contents of the Consent Terms. The learned counsel appearing for the parties pray that a decree be passed in terms of the Consent Terms.

¶13

2] Hence, we pass the following order:-

¶14

I. The Consent Terms are taken on record and marked 'X' for identification. All statements and undertakings of the parties incorporated in the Consent Terms are accepted;

¶15

II. The impugned judgment and decree dated 25.01.2007 is hereby quashed and set aside and the Petition No.A-785 of

1/2

skc

FCA-173-07

2002 is restored;

III. The parties are permitted to carry out amendment to the said Petition for converting the same into a Petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Formal amendment shall be carried out by the parties within a period of four weeks from today. The Family Court shall allow amendment to be carried out on production of an authenticated copy of this Order;

¶21

IV. The amendment shall relate back to the date of the institution of the Petition No.A-785 of 2002;

¶22

V. In Petition No.A-785 of 2002, there shall be a decree of divorce under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 between the Appellant and the Respondent as provided in Clause 17 of the Consent Terms. The marriage solemnized between the Appellant and the Respondent on 27.01.1999 stands dissolved by a decree of divorce under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955;

¶23

VI. There shall be a decree in terms of the Consent Terms in addition to Clauses II to V above;

¶24

VII. Family Court Appeal stands disposed of on above terms;

¶25

VIII.Civil Application No. 213 of 2009 does not survive and the same is disposed of.

¶26

(M. S. SONAK, J.)

¶27

(A. S. OKA, J.)

¶28

2/2

Hemant Baliram Malekar v. Mrs. Shubhangi Hemant Malekar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hemant Baliram Malekar v. Mrs. Shubhangi Hemant Malekar

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

Mr. Amol Sambhaji Thorat and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Revenue and Forests Dept and Ors.

Ramchandra Mahalappa Kambale Vs Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas and Ors.

Shri. Aand Bapu Phadtare and Ors. Vs the Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune and Ors.

Maharashtra Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, through Trustee and Ors. Vs Kalyan Dombivli Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Mr. Shantilal Lalchand Jain and Ors. Vs Mr. Hanif Haji Adam Peer Mohammed Lulaniya and Ors.

Shivaji Ganpatrao Shitole Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.