Allowed

Nikki Singh v. Pramod Singh

Jharkhand HC16 May 2023FA/249/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand disposed of a First Appeal and an interlocutory application seeking condonation of delay. The court granted the delay condonation and dismissed the appeal, noting the parties had mutually compromised and intended to file a mutual divorce.

What did the court decide?

The delay of 659 days was condoned; I.A. No. 7833 of 2019 was disposed of; F.A. No. 249 of 2019 stood disposed of.

Nikki Singh Vs Pramod Singh — Matrimonial and Divorce | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

F.A. No. 249 of 2019

¶3

With

¶4

I.A. No. 7833 of 2019

Nikki Singh

….. Appellant

Versus

Pramod Singh

….. Respondent

CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

¶12

For the Appellant : Mr. Rahul Kumar Gupta, Adv.

¶13

For the Respondent : Mr. Rahul Saboo, Adv.

¶14

17/16.05.2023 I.A. No. 7833 of 2019

¶15

Heard Mr. Rahul Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr.

¶16

Rahul Saboo, learned counsel for the respondent.

¶17

2. This interlocutory application has been preferred by the appellant

¶18

for condoning the delay of 659 days in filing the appeal.

¶19

3. Though several grounds have been taken in this application but considering the subsequent fact with respect to the matter having been compromised between both the parties we are inclined to condone the delay.

¶20

4. Accordingly the delay of 659 days in filing the appeal is, hereby, condoned. I.A. No. 7833 of 2019 stands disposed of.

¶21

F.A. No. 249 of 2019

¶22

5. Report of the mediator reveals that the matter has been compromised between the parties and the terms and conditions have been incorporated in the said report. It appears that both the parties are ready for dissolution of marriage by mutual consent by filing an application under section 13 B of the Hindu Marriage Act.

¶23

6. Mr. Rahul Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant resides at Bokaro and it would be convenient for her even if the application under section 13 B of the Hindu Marriage Act is preferred at Ranchi.

¶24

-2-

¶25

7. Mr. Rahul Saboo, learned counsel for the respondent submits that though the respondent stay at Mumbai but since the matter has been compromised he does not have any difficulty if the application for mutual divorce is filed at Bokaro on even at Ranchi.

¶26

8. Since the matter has been compromised between the parties and they have decided to go them separate ways with the further undertaking by the learned counsel for the respective parties that the application for mutual divorce under section 13 B of the Hindu Marriage Act shall be filed shortly, this First Appeal stands disposed of.

¶27

(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)

¶28

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

¶29

Fahim/Amardeep/

Nikki Singh v. Pramod Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nikki Singh v. Pramod Singh

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

Durgesh Chandra Pan Vs Chura Devi

The State of Jharkhand Vs Dr Narendra Tiwari

Ms Hindustan Copper Limited through Its Chief Manager Finance Namely Debasis De Vs Comercial Taxes

Pankaj Mishra Vs Sushma Jha

M/S R K Construction through Rashid Ashraf Khan Vs the Assistant Commissioner C G S T and Central Excise Ramgarh

M/S B K Construction through Bakhtiyar Khan Vs the Assistant Commissioner C G S T and Central Excise Ramgarh