Disposed¶24

Santosh Kumar Jha v. Sarita Jha

Jharkhand HC7 Jul 2025FA/142/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand High Court 2025 first appeal FA No. 142 of 2023 matrimonial appeal husband v wife disposed of nothing survives settlement reunion parties living together Ahmedabad withdrawal of Original Suit No. 341 of 2023 OMC No. 279 of 2023 G.R. Case No. 35 of 2018 interlocutory application disposed Deoghar judgment and decree dated 03.04.2023 Sujit Narayan Prasad Rajesh Kumar 2025:JHHC:18258-DB

What did the court decide?

First appeal FA No. 142 of 2023 disposed of as nothing survives, the parties having settled and reunited and living together in Ahmedabad; pending interlocutory application(s), if any, also disposed of. ¶24

Santosh Kumar Jha Vs Sarita Jha — Jharkhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2025:JHHC:18258-DB

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI F.A. No. 142 of 2023

¶3

Santosh Kumar Jha aged about 39 Year son of Rameshwar Jha resident of Village Guria, P.O. & P.S. Vounsi, District Banka, (Bihar) and also resident of Janakpur, Bilasi Town Deoghar, P.O. & P.S. & District Deoghar presently residing at flat no. 1502, F1, Meadows, Shantigram near Vaishno Devi Circle, SG Highwary, P.O. & P.S. Gandhinagar District Ahmedabad, State Gujrat.

¶4

... Appellant/Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Sarita Jha wife of Santosh Kumar Jha daughter of Kuldip Mohan Jha resident of Bilasi Town, Deoghar, at presently residing Kakai Dharmshala, near Laumipur Chowk, P.O. B Deoghar P.S. & District Deoghar, Jharkhand.

¶7

... Respondent/Respondent

¶8

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

¶9

------ For the Appellant : Mr. Lalit Yadav, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Onkar Nath Tiwari, Advocate

¶10

16/Dated: 7^th July, 2025

¶11

1. The instant first appeal has been filed by the husband, appellant herein, against the judgment and decree dated 03.04.2023.

¶12

2. It appears from the order dated 8^th May, 2025 that the endeavour was taken for settlement in terms of reunion of the parties.

¶13

3. It further appears from the order dated 8^th May, 2025 that both the parties had agreed to live together, and thereafter both the parties had gone to Ahmedabad.

¶14

¶15

2025:JHHC:18258-DB

¶16

4. Further, the matter was heard on 10^th June, 2025 and this Court was informed that both appellant-husband and respondent-wife are living together showing dignity to each other. It has further been submitted by the respondent wife that the pending litigations will also be withdrawn.

¶17

5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant-husband, on instruction, has submitted that the application had been filed by the respondent wife for withdrawal of the pending litigations, i.e., Original Suit No. 341 of 2023 and OMC No. 279 of 2023. One another case being G.R. Case No. 35 of 2018 is being disposed of.

¶18

6. Learned counsel for the respondent wife has submitted that the application for withdrawal of the pending litigations, for settlement in between the parties, has also been accepted by the concerned Court and now there is no pending proceeding against the husband, the appellant herein.

¶19

7. Learned counsel for the appellant-husband has also submitted that there is no pending litigation now.

¶20

8. Further, it has been submitted by the learned counsel for both the parties that since the appellant-husband and respondent-wife are living together in Ahmedabad, the workplace where the appellanthusband is working, by showing due respect to each other, hence there is no need to keep this appeal pending.

¶21

¶22

2025:JHHC:18258-DB

¶23

9. This Court, considering the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties, is of the view that nothing survives to be adjudicated by this Court.

¶24

10. In view of the settlement of reunion in between the appellanthusband and respondent-wife, and in terms of the fact that the appellant-husband and respondent wife is living together, the instant first appeal being FA No. 142 of 2023 stands disposed of.

¶25

11. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

¶26

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

¶27

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

¶28

Samarth

¶29

Santosh Kumar Jha v. Sarita Jha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Kumar Jha v. Sarita Jha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mansoor Mian Nanhu Mian And Ors. Vs State of Bihar

Saraswati Devi Vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Shri Girdhari Lal Sharma Prop Ms Pasupati Vyapaar

Susmita Gorai Vs Abhijit Gorai

Rakesh Rajan Khalkho Vs Rachna Toppo

Surendra Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand through Secretary, Dept. of Food Public Distribution and Consumer Matters

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

Mansoor Mian  Nanhu Mian And Ors. Vs State of Bihar

Saraswati Devi Vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Shri Girdhari Lal Sharma Prop Ms Pasupati Vyapaar

Susmita Gorai Vs Abhijit Gorai

Rakesh Rajan Khalkho Vs Rachna Toppo

Surendra Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand through Secretary, Dept. of Food Public Distribution and Consumer Matters

Mansoor Mian Nanhu Mian And Ors. Vs State of Bihar