Vitthal S/O Ramchandra Dhengle vs Pooja W/O Vitthal Dhengle — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Vitthal S/O Ramchandra Dhengle vs Pooja W/O Vitthal Dhengle — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the learned Family Court No. 3, Nagpur erred in rejecting, by order dated 15/01/2024 below Exhibit 45, the Petitioner's application for amendment of the petition in Petition No. A/615/2021.

Court's answer

A petition cannot be amended merely to reply to the contents/allegations in the written statement; the learned Family Court Judge rightly appreciated that allowing such amendments would lead to no end of such applications by both sides.

Ratio / Principle

It remains open to the Petitioner to prove the contents of the written statement false, but the proposed amendment as prayed for cannot be allowed.

Key takeaways

The question whether the Respondent had title to pass/sell the suit property is already sub judice in Special Civil Suit No. 537/2021 before the 8th Joint Civil Judge Senior Division, Nagpur and will be decided in that suit; accordingly the proposed amendment in Paragraph No. 20 (xvii) is not required.ratio¶17
No illegality is found in the order passed by the learned Family Court.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench (M.S. Jawalkar, J.; decided 07-02-2025; neutral citation 2025:BHC-NAG:1249): Writ Petition No. 1054/2024, Vitthal Dhengle v. Pooja Dhengle, challenging the order dated 15/01/2024 below Exhibit 45 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court No. 3, Nagpur in Petition No. A/615/2021, whereby the Petitioner-husband's application for amendment of his petition was rejected. Held: (i) it is not permissible to amend a petition only to reply to the contents of the written statement, and the Family Court rightly appreciated that permitting such amendments would lead to no end of applications by both sides; (ii) it is always open to the Petitioner to prove the contents of the written statement false, yet the proposed amendment as prayed for cannot be allowed; (iii) the dispute over the Respondent's alleged sale of the suit property and her title thereto is already sub judice in Special Civil Suit No. 537/2021 before the 8th Joint Civil Judge Senior Division, Nagpur, and will be decided there, so the proposed amendment in Paragraph No. 20 (xvii) is not required. Finding no illegality in the impugned order, the Court dismissed the Writ Petition and confirmed the Family Court's order dated 15/01/2024.

2025:BHC-NAG:1249

14wp1054.24

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

WRIT PETITION NO. 1054/2024

Vitthal Dhengle ...VERSUS... Pooja Dhengle

∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞ Of fi ce Notes, Of fi ce Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders

∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞ Ms. M. Nagi, Advocate for the Petitioner(s) Shri M.A. Randive, Advocate for the Respondent

CORAM :- M.S. JAWALKAR, J. FEBRUARY 07, 2025

(1) Heard learned Counsel for the respective parties.

(2) The present Petition is filed by the Petitioner challenging the order dated 15/01/2024 passed below Exhibit 45 by the learned Judge, Family Court No. 3, Nagpur in Petition No. A/615/2021.

(3) On perusal of the Application for proposed amendment, it appears that it is specifically the para wise reply to the written statement and specific pleadings. It is not permissible to amend the Petition only to reply to the contents in the written statement. The learned Judge, Family Court has rightly appreciated that “Perusal of Application of Petitioner shows that he intends to reply all the allegations made by Respondent in her written statement against him. The amendment cannot be allowed for such purposes. If amendment

..A..

2

14wp1054.24

is allowed for replying the allegations made in the written statement, then there will be no end to such applications and amendments by both the sides.”

(4) It is always open for the Petitioner to prove the contents in the written statement as false. However, the proposed amendment, as prayed for, cannot be allowed. So far as the contention of the Petitioner that the Respondent sold the suit property which is the subject matter of Special Civil Suit No. 537/2021 pending before the learned 8^th Joint Civil Judge Senior Division, Nagpur is concerned, the subject matter is already sub-judice before the learned 8^th Joint Civil Judge Senior Division, Nagpur. Whether the Respondent was having title to pass it over will be decided in the said Special Civil Suit. Even the proposed amendment in Paragraph No. 20 (xvii) is also not required. I do not see any illegality in the order passed by the learned Family Court.

(5) As such, the Writ Petition stands dismissed . The impugned order dated 15/01/2024 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court No. 3, Nagpur is hereby confirmed.

Signed by: A.P. ANSARI ..A.. Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 10/02/2025 10:51:06