Allowed

Vishwas Vasantrao Muglikar v. Jyoti Murlidhar Muglikar

Bombay HC18 Sept 2017FCA/51/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an appeal against a nullity decree and converted the proceedings into a divorce by mutual consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act. The court set aside the previous nullity decree due to a successful mediation settlement and waived the mandatory six-month cooling-off period given the parties' 35-year separation.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was allowed, the nullity decree was quashed, the marriage was dissolved by mutual consent under Section 13-B, and the six-month period was waived.

Vishwas Vasantrao Muglikar Vs Jyoti Murlidhar Muglikar — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

( 1 )

¶2

fca51.04

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 51 OF 2004 WITH

¶5

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3480 OF 2009
AND
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4505 OF 2009
AND
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6357 OF 2017

¶6

Vishwas s/o. Vasantrao Muglikar..Appellant
Age. 43 years, Occ. Government Servant[original
R/o. Permanently residing at Dhankawadi,petitioner]
Near Petrol Pump, Pune.

¶7

Versus

¶8

Jyoti Murlidhar Muglikar,..Respondent
Age. 44 years, Occ. Household,[original
R/o. Omerga, Tq. Omerga,respondent]
Dist. Osmanabad
C/o. Murlidhar Shriniwasrao Muglikar,
R/o. Omerga, Tq. Omerga,
Dist. Osmanabad.

¶9

Mr.R.N. Dhorde, Sr. Counsel i/b. Mr.V.R. Dhorde, Advocate
for the appellant.

¶10

Dr.S.D. Tawshikar, Advocate for sole respondent.

¶11

CORAM : T.V.NALAWADE &
S.M.GAVHANE,JJ.
DATED :18.09.2017

¶12

JUDGMENT [PER : S.M. GAVHANE, J.] :-

¶13

1.This Family Court Appeal has been filed by the
husband challenging the judgment and decree dated
19.07.2004 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court,
Aurangabad dismissing his Petition No.A-173 of 1997 under
section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for nullity of
marriage or in the alternative for annulling the marriage
between him and the respondent by a decree of nullity, as
per section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

¶14

2.The respondent/wife has filed Civil Application
No.4505 of 2009 thereby praying to direct the appellant/
husband to pay interim alimony of Rs.10,000/- per month,
pending hearing and disposal of the aforesaid Family
Court Appeal and further to direct the respondent to
deposit interim maintenance of Rs.13,200/- in this Court
immediately, so also to direct him to deposit fees of
advocate and expenses of Rs.6000/- in this Court with

¶15

liberty to withdraw the same with other suitable and
equitable reliefs.

¶16

3.The appellant/husband also filed Civil

¶17

Application No.3480 of 2009 thereby praying to allow him
to produce additional evidence as per the list of
documents annexed to the Civil Application.

¶18

4.However, during the pendency of the above
proceedings i.e. the Family Court Appeal and the Civil
Applications, the matter was referred to the Mediation.
As per the Mediator's report the Mediation was successful

¶19

and as per consent terms annexed to said report the
parties have agreed to settle the dispute and they have
agreed to end their relationship and to obtain a decree
of divorce by mutual consent under section 13-B of the
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

¶20

5.Thereupon, the parties have filed Civil

¶21

Application No.6357 of 2017 on 25.04.2017 thereby praying

¶22

to treat their Family Court Appeal No.51 of 2004 as a
petition for divorce by mutual consent under section 13-B
of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and to pass decree of
divorce by mutual consent under section 13-B of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955. To support the contentions in the
application, the parties have relied upon the ratio laid
down in the case of Vinod Batra Vs. Sushma Rani, FAO

¶23

No.10044 of 2014of Punjab and Haryana High Court at
Chandigarh, decided on 22.02.2017 and in the case of Smt.
Ekta w/o. Navin Patil & Anr. Vs. Shri Navin s/o. Sukhram

¶24

Patil, FCA Nos.129/14, 132/14 with WP No.4161/14[Nagpur

¶25

Bench of Bombay High Court]decided on 10.02.2017,
respectively seeking permission to convert the petition
originally filed under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage

¶26

Act, 1955 into one under section 13-B of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955 and Civil Application (CAO)
No.156/2017 Family Court Appeal No.129/14 for permission

¶27

to convert the proceedings of the said appeal into a

¶28

petition under section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act,
1955, which were allowed. We have perused the facts and

¶29

orders in the above decisions.

¶30

6.As per order dated 08.08.2017, this Court

¶31

interacted with the appellant and respondent and they
stated that the compromise arrived at between them and

¶32

they have decided to settle the dispute amicably. The
appellant husband has paid Rs.1,50,000/- to respondent

¶33

wife as mentioned in above order. Thereafter, the matter

¶34

was fixed today for further consideration. Along with

¶35

the application, the parties have filed consent terms
[Exh.C-1]. As per the said consent terms, the respondent
wife has agreed to accept Rs.21,50,000/- towards one time

¶36

settlement against all their past, existing and future
rights and both have requested to pass decree for
dissolution of marriage by mutual consent in terms of

¶37

clause Nos.(a) to (e) of the consent terms.

¶38

7.Today the parties are present. Learned Sr.

¶39

Counsel for the husband and learned Counsel for the wife

¶40

are heard. Necessary enquiry is made. Learned Sr.

¶41

Counsel submitted that total amount is paid towards

¶42

settlement and demand drafts of amount of Rs. 20,00,000/-
(Rupees Twenty Lakhs) are brought and they are handed
over to the learned Counsel for wife. Photocopy of the

¶43

demand drafts are taken on record. Learned Counsel for
wife undertakes to give separate receipt to the husband
in respect of this amount. Considering the submissions

¶44

made by the learned Sr. Counsel for the husband and
learned Counsel for the wife and the ratio laid down by
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Amardeep Singh
Vs. Harveen Kaur, Civil Appeal No. 11158 of 2017relied

¶45

upon by the parties, decided on 12th September, 2017 and
particularly the observations in para 21 i.e. “Since we

¶46

are of the view that the period mentioned in Section
13B(2) is not mandatory but directory, it will be open to

¶47

the Court to exercise its discretion in the facts and
circumstances of each case where there is no possibility
of parties resuming cohabitation and there are chances of
alternative rehabilitation”, the consent terms Exh.C-1
filed by the parties to this proceeding along with Civil

¶48

Application No. 6357 of 2017, having regard to the fact

¶49

that the parties are residing separate since last 35
years and there are no chances of their coming together
and that the Mediation was successful, it is just to
dissolve the marriage between the appellant - original
petitioner and the respondent, by mutual consent under
section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by allowing

¶50

above application by waiving six months period under
section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and by
setting aside the impugned order by allowing the appeal.

¶51

8.Hence, the following order is passed :-

¶52

(A)The appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and

¶53

decree dated 19.07.2004 passed in Petition No. A-173 of
1997 by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Aurangabad is
quashed and set aside and it is substituted by the
following decree.

¶54

(i)Civil Application No.6357 of 2017

¶55

filed by the parties for divorce by mutual
consent under section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage

¶56

Act, 1955 treating the Family Court Appeal as a
petition under section 13-B of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955 is allowed. The appellant/
original petitioner shall make necessary
amendment in the original petition forthwith.

¶57

(ii)The marriage performed between the
petitioner and the respondent stands dissolved

¶58

under the provisions of section 13-B of the
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in terms and condition
as stipulated in consent terms Exh.C-1, annexed
to the application and decree be drawn
accordingly.

¶59

(B)The Family Court Appeal and all connected Civil
Applications stand disposed of in above terms.

¶60

[S.M.GAVHANE,J.] [T.V.NALAWADE,J.]

¶61

snk/2017/SEP17/ fca51.04

Vishwas Vasantrao Muglikar v. Jyoti Murlidhar Muglikar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishwas Vasantrao Muglikar v. Jyoti Murlidhar Muglikar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bibhishan Rajaram Kale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Sandip Dadarao Sable and Ors.

Dadasaheb Dattatraya Lagad Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Poty @ Popat Parkhiya Kale

State of Maharashtra Vs Shivaji Bansi Karpe and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Babu Ghodake