Remanded

Nirmallya Banerjee v. Antara Banerjee

Jharkhand HC9 Aug 2021FA/150/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this first appeal, the High Court of Jharkhand set aside an order withdrawing a suit for dissolution of marriage. The court remanded the matter to the Family Court for adjudication as both parties now desire a trial on merits after mediation efforts failed. The present appeal was disposed of in consequence.

What did the court decide?

The impugned judgment disposing of the suit as withdrawn is set aside and the matter remanded to the Family Court for adjudication.

Nirmallya Banerjee Vs Antara Banerjee — Matrimonial and Divorce | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI First Appeal No. 150 of 2019

¶2

CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary Through: Video Conferencing

¶3

For the Appellant: Mr. Srijit Choudhary, Advocate For the Respondent: Mrs. Jasvindar Mazumdar, Advocate

¶4

13 / 09.08.2021 The plaintiff is the appellant being aggrieved by the impugned judgment dated 15.01.2019 by which, the suit was disposed of as withdrawn on his application, but he was directed to pay a cost of Rs. 30,000/- to the defendantwife / Respondent herein as expenses of the proceedings, failing which it would be realized by recourse to law.

¶5

Perusal of the impugned order indicates that the defendant-wife objected to the withdrawal of the suit and wanted adjudication. The petitioner-husband was wavering initially and he wanted to pursue the suit, but after the settlement, he chose to withdraw the suit for his own reasons. Now learned counsel for the appellant Mr. Srijit Choudhary submits on specific instructions that the appellant-husband is serious and interested in prosecuting the suit for dissolution of marriage under the provisions of Special Marriage Act, 1954.

¶6

Learned counsel for the Respondent submits that the Respondent has always been willing to have an adjudication of the matrimonial dispute. According to her, it would be proper that the matter be remanded for adjudication on merits. Learned counsel for the parties also submit that efforts for amicable settlement during the pendency of this appeal through mediation at JHALSA had remained a non-starter.

¶7

We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and taken note of the brief facts of the case, as are borne from the records and also perused the impugned judgment. It appears that the parties had joined the issue on the plea of withdrawal of the suit by the petitioner-husband before the learned Family Court, Dhanbad. However, appellant is now interested in adjudication of the suit. Respondent also wants matrimonial suit to be adjudicated by the learned Family Court.

¶8

In view of the aforesaid circumstances, matter is remanded to the learned Family Court, Dhanbad for adjudication. The impugned judgment dated

¶9

¶10

15.01.2019 passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Additional Family Court, Dhanbad in Original Suit No. 321/2018 is set aside. Parties are directed to appear in person or through their counsel before the learned Family Court, Dhanbad on 31.08.2021. Appeal stands disposed of.

¶11

(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J)

¶12

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J)

¶13

Ranjeet/

Nirmallya Banerjee v. Antara Banerjee

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nirmallya Banerjee v. Antara Banerjee

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

Neha Parween Vs the State of Jharkhand

Chanda Sharma Vs Sanjay Kumar Sharma

The Union of India through Its Principal Secretary Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Vs Atibir Industries Co. Ltd. through Its Director Sandeep Kumar Sarawgi

Sujit Kumar Vs Smt Jayanti Kumari

Ms Prakash Mica Exports Private Limited through Its Director Shri Shiv Prakash Bagaria Vs the State of Jharkhand

Tata Sky Limited through Its Authorized Signatory and Chief Financial Officer Mr Sambasivan Genesan Vs the State of Jharkhand through Its Secretary Cum Commissioner of Commercial Taxes