The High Court of Judicature at Bombay rejected a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a stay and prohibition against pending divorce proceedings based on the petitioner's employment abroad. The court held the petition misconceived.
The writ petition was rejected and dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
crwp4599
1
ssp
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.4599 OF 2015
Office Notes, Office
Memorandam of Coram,
appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders
or directions and
Registrar’s orders
Mr.Prakash Dhopatkar i/b Mr.Santosh Sambhaji Vhatkar
for the Petitioner
Mr.V.P.Malvankar, AGP `A' Panel for the Respondent
No.1
Mr.M.P.Panchakshari for respondent No.2
CORAM :A.S.OKA AND
R.D.DHANUKA,JJ.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 8, 2016
P.C.
1Heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner. This petition under
Article 226 of the Constitution of
India is misconceived. The present
petitioner who is the husband of the
second respondent is a party respondent
to Hindu Marriage Petition filed by the
second respondent for seeking a decree
of divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act
which is pending before the Court of
Civil Judge (S.D.), Kalyan.
2The contention raised in this
petition is that the petitioner is
2 crwp4599
employed in Dubai and he is not in a
position to regularly attend the
proceedings of the said petition filed
by the second respondent. The first
substantive prayer is for stay to the
proceedings of the Marriage Petition.
The second prayer is for issuing a writ
ofprohibitiondirectingthe
respondents not to conduct the trial
in absence of the petitioner.
3Both the prayers are misconceived.
No such writ can be issued under
Article 226 of the Constitution of
India. A petition of the year 2015
filed under the Hindu Marriage Act,1955
cannot be allowed to be delayed in such
a fashion. The writ petition is
misconceived and the same is rejected.
(R.D.DHANUKA,J)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ of prohibition and stay can be issued under Article 226 to stop proceedings in a pending divorce petition filed under the Hindu Marriage Act.
Whether work abroad by the petitioner to the extent of preventing regular attendance is a valid ground for such writ.
Whether a petition under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 can be delayed due to an application for stay.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Undisclosed Petitioner
Undisclosed Respondent No.1
Undisclosed Respondent No.2
A.S. Oka
R.D. Dhenuka
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court