Dismissed

Narendra S/O. Parasmal Jain v. Smt. Dipali W/O. Narendra Jain

Karnataka HC9 Jan 2024MFA/104391/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this miscellaneous first appeal, the High Court of Karnataka dismissed the appeal filed by the husband against the trial court's order dismissing his Section 13(B) divorce petition. The court held that since the wife withdrew her consent during the proceedings, the trial court correctly dismissed the petition, finding no illegality in the order. The appellant is left to initiate separate procee

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed as the trial court correctly noted the withdrawal of consent by the respondent for divorce.

Narendra S/O. Parasmal Jain Vs Smt. Dipali W/O… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:437-DB MFA No. 104391 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S G PANDIT

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K V ARAVIND

¶9

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 104391 OF 2023 (MC-)

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

NARENDRA S/O. PARASMAL JAIN, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. THEATRE ROAD, JAMKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOT-587301.

¶12

…APPELLANT

¶13

(BY SRI. GIRISH A. YADAWAD AND SRI. RAHUL S. KUNTOJI, ADVOCATES)

AND:

CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN

KATTIMANI

Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Date: 2024.01.12 15:12:20 +0530

¶18

SMT. DIPALI W/O. NARENDRA JAIN, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. THEATRE ROAD, JAMKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOT-587301.

¶19

…RESPONDENT

¶20

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.28 OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 18.04.2023 PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, JAMKHANDI, IN M.C NO. 28/2022 AND ALLOW THE SAID PETITION BY GRANTING A DECREE OF DIVORCE THEREBY DISSOLVING THE MARRIAGE BETWEEN APPELLANT AND RESPONDENT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶21

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, S G PANDIT, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

¶23

NC: 2024:KHC-D:437-DB MFA No. 104391 of 2023

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

Appellant, petitioner in M.C. No.28/2022 is before this Court aggrieved by order dated 18.04.2023, dismissing the petition filed under Section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

¶26

2. Heard Shri. Girish A. Yadawad, learned counsel

¶27

for appellant and perused the appeal papers.

¶28

3. Learned counsel Shri. Girish A. Yadawad, would

¶29

submit that petitioner-husband and respondent-wife filed M.C. No.28/2022 seeking mutual divorce under Section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Learned counsel would submit that after recording of evidence, the respondent-wife filed memo making allegation against the petitioner as well as her earlier advocate. Further, learned counsel would submit that respondent also filed memo withdrawing consent for Section 13(B) divorce. Learned counsel taking through the impugned order would submit that the Trial Court accepted the allegations made against

¶30

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:437-DB MFA No. 104391 of 2023

¶31

the petitioner and on noting the allegations, the Trial Court dismissed the petition. Learned counsel would submit that the Trial Court committed an error in dismissing the petition accepting the allegation against appellant. It is submitted that when the Trial Court had recorded the evidence, it ought to have passed order taking note of the material on record and it could not have dismissed the petition only because respondent-wife withdrew her consent for divorce.

¶32

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and on perusal of the appeal papers, we are of the view that the appellant has not made out any ground to interfere with the impugned order. The petition is filed under Section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by petitioner and respondent seeking consent divorce. During the course of proceedings, respondent-wife withdrew her consent for divorce and in the memo, respondent has also made certain allegations against the appellant. The Trial Court recorded the allegations contained in the memo and

¶33

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:437-DB MFA No. 104391 of 2023

¶34

also noted the withdrawal of consent by respondent and dismissed the petition. There is no finding with regard to allegation and allegation made in the memo is only recorded in the order. It cannot be said that the Trial Court has accepted the allegation made by respondent/wife and dismissed the petition. Section 13(B) petition is dismissed since respondent/wife withdrew her consent. Under Section 13(B) Court could grant divorce only on consent. We do not find any illegality in the order passed by the Trial Court. However, it is open for the appellant to initiate appropriate proceedings against respondent/wife for divorce.

¶35

5. Accordingly, appeal stands dismissed.

Sd/JUDGE

Sd/JUDGE

RKM

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31

Narendra S/O. Parasmal Jain v. Smt. Dipali W/O. Narendra Jain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narendra S/O. Parasmal Jain v. Smt. Dipali W/O. Narendra Jain

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

D Nagarjun S/O D Hanumanthappa Vs Director General of Police

Basavaraj Shivashankarappa Terdal Vs Shri S C Bewoor

Sharmila W/O. Ramjan Ali Dudekula Vs Ramjan Ali S/O. Vannursab Dudekula

Hdfc Ergo General Ins. Com Ltd. Vs Smt. Renuka

Bharati W/O. Suresh Bhavannavar Vs Suresh S/O. Devendra Bhavannavar

Bhimanayaka @ Beemanaik S/O Basyanaik, Vs Shambhu R K S/O Rajashekhaarappa