Appeal against rejection of an application to dismiss a fresh divorce decree petition filed after an earlier petition was dismissed for non-prosecution. The court held that at the Order VII Rule 11 threshold only the petition's averments matter and the wife's objections form her defence; no interference warranted.
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.
$~46
SUDHA JAINA .....Appellant
Through: Mr. Dinesh Kumar Gupta & Mr. Trivesh Sharma, Advs.
versus
DR ER RAJAINDERR JAINA .....Respondent Through:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR
O R D E R % 10.09.2025
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/09/2025 at 12:02:00
VII Rule 11, read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 1908, [“ CPC ”] at the threshold, which has been rejected by the learned Family Court.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/09/2025 at 12:02:00
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.
application(s), if any, is dismissed.
HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J. SEPTEMBER 10, 2025/ v / va
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/09/2025 at 12:02:00
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a prior divorce petition dismissed for non-prosecution bars a fresh divorce petition under Order IX Rule 9(1) CPC.
Whether at the Order VII Rule 11 stage only the contents of the petition are to be examined, excluding the applicant's pleas as defence.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Nidhi Jain vs. Ankit JainReferred
[2023 SCC OnLine Del 4369] · Who else cites this
Ram Kalan vs. Purshotam Alias MintuReferred
[2013 SCC OnLine 12365] · Who else cites this
5 provisions across 3 enactments
Sudha Jaina
Dr Er Rajainderr Jaina
Anil Kshetarpal
Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar
As recorded by the court registry
An appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act 1984 against a decree or order of a Family Court.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
