Allowed

Sunil Kumar v. the Director General- S.S.B & Ors.

Delhi HC12 Aug 2025W.P.(C)/3983/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a miscellaneous application raising a to correct typographical errors in a previous judgment dismissing a divorce petition. The Court allowed the application to rectify the reference of the matrimonial case number from HMA 767/2013 to HMA 747/2013.

What did the court decide?

The application seeking correction of typographical errors in the reference of the matrimonial case number was allowed.

Sunil Kumar Vs the Director General- S.S.B & Ors. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~36

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 3983/2022

¶4

SUNIL KUMAR .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Niraj Jha, Adv.

¶6

versus

¶7

THE DIRECTOR GENERAL- S.S.B & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Farman Ali, SPC with Ms. Usha Jamnal, Adv.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA

¶10

JUDGMENT (ORAL)

¶11

% 04.09.2025

¶12

C. HARI SHANKAR, J.

¶13

CM APPL. 55920/2025 (for modification)

¶14

1. This application seeks correction of certain typographical errors in the judgment dated 12 August 2025, whereby we have disposed of WP(C) 3983/2022.

¶15

2. It is pointed out that the reference to the matrimonial dispute between the parties, as shown in paragraphs 6, 12 and 14 of the judgment should read as HMA 747/2013 instead of HMA 767/2013.

¶16

3. Mr. Farman Ali, learned SPC for the respondents has acknowledged this fact.

¶17

Signature Not Verified

¶18

Signed By:PREETI WP(C) 3983/2022 Signing Date:10.09.2025 10:03:46

¶19

Page 1 of 2

¶20

4. Accordingly, the paragraphs 6, 12 and 14 of the judgment would read thus:

¶21

“6. The petitioner married one Sunita Devi on 23 November 2007. The matrimonial relationship between them soured. The petitioner filed Misc (Civil) HMA No.747/2013 under Section 13(1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955¹ for divorce, before the Family Court, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.

¶22

Following this, as a result, the divorce petition Misc (Civil) HMA No.747/2013 was resuscitated. By judgment dated 7 March 2018, the learned Family Court dismissed the divorce petition of the petitioner against Sunita Devi.

¶23

The judgment and decree dated 24 June 2017 of the learned Family Court, dismissing Misc (Civil) HMA No.747/2013 was challenged by the petitioner before the High Court of Rajasthan by way of CMA 2343/2018.”

¶24

5. This order shall be treated as a corrigendum to the judgment dated 12 August 2025.

¶25

6. The application is allowed accordingly.

¶26

C. HARI SHANKAR, J

¶27

OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J

¶28

SEPTEMBER 4, 2025/ ng

¶29

1 “HMA”, hereinafter

¶30

Signature Not Verified

¶31

Signed By:PREETI WP(C) 3983/2022 Signing Date:10.09.2025 10:03:46

¶32

Page 2 of 2

Sunil Kumar v. the Director General- S.S.B & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Kumar v. the Director General- S.S.B & Ors.

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

Guddi Devi & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Sheela Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Jnrb International LLP Vs Commissioner of Customs

Virender Kumar Chopra Vs Raj Kumar Prop

Ravinder Kumar Vs Indo-Tibetan Border Police Force and Ors.

India Tourism Development Corporation Vs K.A. Kanekar

Sushen Mohan Gupta Vs the Joint Director (ADJ-3), Directorate of Enforcement and Anr.

Anoop Singh Vs Muncipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr.

Guddi Devi & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Ms Mahesh Gupta Vs Guru Gobind Singh Indraprstha University and Ors.

Ajit Singh Vs Sh. Rahul Rasgotra & Ors.

Nitin Sharma Vs Union of India and Ors.

Rajinder Singh and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Rajeswara Rao Hanumanthu Vs Union of India and Ors.