Allowed

Kainaaz Daneshmand Unwalla (Plaintiff 1) v. Daneshmand Homi Unwalla (Plaintiff 2)

Bombay HC26 Oct 2016PS/16/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Parsi Suit No. 16 of 2016, the Bombay High Court decreed a divorce by mutual consent for the plaintiffs pursuant to Section 32B of the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936, based on accepted consent terms.

What did the court decide?

Dissolution of marriage by mutual consent and decree in terms of the consent terms including custody, maintenance, and property.

Kainaaz Daneshmand Unwalla (Plaintiff 1) Vs… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

907-PS16-16.DOC

¶2

ATUL

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

PARSI SUIT NO. 16 OF 2016

¶5

Kainaaz Daneshmand Unwalla…Plaintiff No. 1
And
Daneshmand Homi Unwalla…Plaintiff No. 2

¶6

Mrs. Mrunalini Deshmukh, i/b Mr. Narayana B. Suvarna, for both
the Plaintiffs.

¶7

CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED: 26th October 2016

¶8

PC:-

¶9

1.The Plaintiffs seek a divorce by mutual consent under Section
32B of the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936. The Plaintiffs
were married on 23rd December 2006 in Mumbai according to
Zoroastrian rites and ceremonies. The 1st Plaintiff wife was then
unmarried. The 2nd Plaintiff husband was previously married and
divorced. Both Plaintiffs are Parsi Zoroastrians.

¶10

2.The Plaintiffs had one child Jahaan born on 11th March 2010.
He is presently with the 1st Plaintiff wife.

¶11

3. After marriage, the parties lived together as husband and wife at Dadar Parsi Colony, Mumbai. A few years after marriage, the parties found themselves to be incompatible. They attempted to

¶12

Page 1 of 3
26th October 2016

¶13

907-PS16-16.DOC

¶14

resolve their differences, but were not successful. Although living in
the same house, they stayed apart and there has been no
cohabitation between them since 10th January 2013.

¶15

4.Finally, on 1st December 2015 the 2nd Plaintiff husband left
the matrimonial home. He presently resides elsewhere at Khareghat
Road, Dadar Parsi Colony, Mumbai while the 1st Plaintiff wife
continues to stay at Jame Jamshed Road, Dadar Parsi Colony,
Mumbai.

¶16

5.All attempts by friends and family to bring the parties
together have failed. The parties have, therefore, decided to dissolve
their marriage by mutual consent.

¶17

6.To this end, they have drawn up Consent Terms. These are
annexed at Exhibit “B” to the plaint from pages 11 to 16. I have
considered these Consent Terms. Provision is made here for
custody, access, vacation access, relocation of the minor child
outside Mumbai, maintenance, alimony, child support, education of
the minor and the questions relating to jewellery and personal
estate.

¶18

7.The Consent Terms are in order. The undertakings in the
Consent Terms are accepted as undertakings to the Court.

¶19

8.Both Plaintiffs are present in Court. They have each filed
Affidavits in lieu of examination-in-chief. Both confirm the
correctness of what is stated in the Plaint and the Affidavits.

¶20

Page 2 of 3
26th October 2016

¶21

907-PS16-16.DOC

¶22

9.There being no impediment to the grant of relief, the Suit is
decreed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). The marriage of the
parties is dissolved by mutual consent under Section 32B of the
Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936.

¶23

10.There will also be a decree in terms of the Consent Terms,
Exhibit “B” to the Plaint. Decree to be drawn up in accordance with
the Consent Terms.

¶24

11.All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order.

¶25

(G. S. PATEL, J.)

¶26

Page 3 of 3
26th October 2016

Kainaaz Daneshmand Unwalla (Plaintiff 1) v. Daneshmand Homi Unwalla (Plaintiff 2)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kainaaz Daneshmand Unwalla (Plaintiff 1) v. Daneshmand Homi Unwalla (Plaintiff 2)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Umesh Narendrabhai Dave Vs Suresh Harilal Dave and 5 Ors.

Vidula Rajesh Musale Vs Rajesh Sadashiv Musale (Deceased)

Saurabh Subhash Pawse Vs Nikhil Subhash Pawse and Pratima Nikhil Pawse

Niki Arvind Parekh and Durva Niki Parekh Vs -

Vipul Bharat Thakkar, American and Meenu v.Thakkar Vs Vijay Kamlesh Nichaney and Anr. and Tiyasha Vipul Thakkar (Minor)

Shree Manav Seva Sangh Vs Mr Stein Arthur Ramstad and Anr. (Prop Adopters)