Shraddha Gupta Vs Sumit Jain — Matrimonial and Divorce | Delhi HC (2025)

Shraddha Gupta Vs Sumit Jain — Matrimonial and Divorce | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned Order (divorce decree under Section 13B HMA) set aside as perverse; Respondent's Section 13(1)(ia) divorce petition restored to its original number; parties, through respective counsels, directed to appear before the learned Family Court on 04.12.2025; appeal and pending applications disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Family Court's decree of divorce granted under Section 13B of the HMA could stand where no Section 13B application was filed by the parties and the statements of the parties in the first and second motions were never recorded.

Court's answer

No petition/application under Section 13B of the HMA was filed by the parties, and the statements of the parties in the first and second motions were never recorded.

Ratio / Principle

Since no Section 13B application existed and no motion statements were recorded, the Impugned Order granting divorce under Section 13B is perverse and is set aside in light of this Court's judgment in Upinder Kaur Malhotra v. Capt. Teghjeet Singh Malhotra and Anr (2025:DHC:8491-DB).

Key takeaways

The Respondent's pending petition under Section 13(1)(ia) for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce is restored to its original number.ratio¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

MAT.APP.(F.C.) 330/2023 (Delhi High Court; Division Bench of Anil Kshetarpal and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar JJ.; order dated 26.11.2025): Appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 partially challenging the Judgment dated 03.10.2023 of the learned Judge, Family Courts, Patiala House Courts, Delhi (HMA 181/2023, 'Sumit Jain v. Shraddha Gupta'), which granted a decree of divorce under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Counsel for both sides admitted that no Section 13B application was filed and the first/second motion statements were not recorded; the decree was held perverse and set aside in light of this Court's judgment in Upinder Kaur Malhotra v. Capt. Teghjeet Singh Malhotra and Anr, 2025:DHC:8491-DB. The Respondent's Section 13(1)(ia) cruelty-based divorce petition was restored to its original number, the parties were directed to appear before the Family Court on 04.12.2025, and the appeal stood disposed of.

$~74

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

MAT.APP.(F.C.) 330/2023, CM APPL. 57769/2023 (Stay) & CM APPL. 12520/2024 (Dir.)

SHRADDHA GUPTA

.....Appellant

Through: Ms. Nandita Rao, Sr. Adv. With Mr. R. Bansal, Mr. Amit Peswari, Ms. Sakshi Pareek, Mr. Vinayak, Advs.

versus

SUMIT JAIN .....Respondent Through: Mr. Prosenjeet Banerjee and Mr. Vikrant Kumar, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

O R D E R % 26.11.2025

This matter is taken up today as 25^th November, 2025 was declared a holiday on account of the 350^th anniversary of „Guru Teg Bahadur‟s Martyrdom Day‟.

The present Appeal, filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, partially challenges the Judgment dated 03.10.2023 [“ Impugned Order ”] passed by the learned Judge, Family Courts, Patiala House Courts, Delhi in case being HMA 181/2023, titled “Sumit Jain v. Shraddha Gupta” .

Learned counsel for the parties admit that there was no application filed by the parties under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 [ “HMA” ] for dissolving the marriage by mutual consent.

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 01/12/2025 at 14:19:35

It is noticed that the Respondent filed a petition under Section 13(1)(ia), wherein, the Appellant, in her written statement also sought for dissolution of marriage under Section 13(1)(ia) raising various grounds seeking to establish cruelty by the Respondent. However, the learned Family Court has proceeded to grant decree of divorce under Section 13B of the HMA.

Neither a petition under Section 13B of the HMA came to be filed nor the statements of the parties in the first and second motion were recorded.

Consequently, the Impugned Order, being perverse, is set-aside in light of the Judgement pronounced by this Court in Upinder Kaur Malhotra v. Capt. Teghjeet Singh Malhotra and Anr¹ . 7. The petition filed by the Respondent under Section 13(1)(ia) for dissolving the marriage by a decree of divorce is restored to its original number.

Parties, through their respective counsels are directed to appear before the learned Family Court on 04.12.2025.

Accordingly, the present Appeal along with pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of, in the aforesaid terms.

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J. NOVEMBER 26, 2025/tk/kr

1 2025:DHC:8491-DB

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 01/12/2025 at 14:19:35