Disposed¶48

Sri Dilbag Singh v. Smt. Sumana C v

Karnataka HC15 Oct 2025MFA/3228/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mutual-consent dissolution of marriage in a pending matrimonial first appeal: Karnataka HC accepts compromise petition (Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC) and joint application under Section 13B, Hindu Marriage Act; marriage dissolved, decree of divorce directed, compromise terms Clauses (1)-(10) made part of decree; arises from Family Court Bengaluru's dismissal of Section 13(1)(ia) divorce petition in M.C.No.3742/2016; NC: 2025:KHC:40979-DB.

What did the court decide?

Marriage between the appellant and the respondent dissolved by mutual consent under Section 13B; decree of divorce directed to be made; terms of the compromise (Clauses (1) to (10) of the compromise petition) form part of the decree. ¶48

Sri Dilbag Singh Vs Smt. Sumana C v — Matrimonial and Divorce | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶48

Issue for consideration

Whether the marriage between the appellant and the respondent should be dissolved by mutual consent under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act on the basis of the compromise petition and the joint application, the parties not pressing the relief for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia). +1 more

¶44

Court's answer

The parties having settled their differences amicably, resolved to put an end to their marriage, and not pressing the relief for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia), the court deemed it fit to accept the compromise petition and allow the application under Section 13-B of the Act.

¶44

Ratio / Principle

Directions issued: the appeal is disposed of; the application under Section 13B of the Act is allowed; the marriage between the appellant and the respondent is dissolved and the decree of divorce is directed to be made accordingly; the terms of the compromise, as reflected in Clauses (1) to (10) of the compromise petition, form part of the decree.

¶50

Key takeaways

The court did not act on the compromise petition as an application under Section 13B, since no such prayer was made in it that would permit passing an order for dissolution of marriage on the ground of mutual consent; a separate joint application under Section 13B was thereafter filed and acted upon.ratio¶41

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, MFA No. 3228 of 2020 (FC), decided 15.10.2025 (oral judgment per Jayant Banerji J; coram Jayant Banerji and K. V. Aravind JJ). Appeal under Section 19(1) of the Family Court Act against the judgment and decree dated 04.12.2019 of the III Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, in M.C.No.3742/2016 dismissing a divorce petition under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Pending appeal, the parties filed a compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC with affidavits; the court observed that the compromise petition contained no prayer treating it as an application under Section 13B, whereupon a joint application under Section 13B supported by affidavits was filed. Holding: the parties having amicably settled their differences and resolved to end the marriage, and not pressing the Section 13(1)(ia) relief, the compromise petition was accepted and the Section 13B application allowed; the marriage stands dissolved, the decree of divorce is to be drawn accordingly, and the terms of compromise (Clauses (1) to (10)) form part of the decree.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:40979-DB MFA No. 3228 of 2020

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND

¶8

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3228 OF 2020 (FC)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI.DILBAG SINGH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, S/O LATE SRI SEWA SINGH MANDER, NO.1130/1131, 70B, MARUTI NAGAR, SAHAKARANAGAR POST, BANGALORE-560 092.

¶11

…APPELLANT

¶12

(BY SRI. K.S.PONNAPPA., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by K G RENUKAMBA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

SMT.SUMANA.C.V, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, D/O SRI C.VENKATESHALU, AND SMT. PRAMILA.M, NO.5A, 3RD MAIN, 3RD BLOCK, KALYAN NAGAR, HRBR ROAD, BANGALORE-560 092.

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY SRI.A.SIVADASAN ., ADVOCATE)

¶18

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(1) OF FAMILY COURT ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 04.12.2019 PASSED IN M.C.NO.3742/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 13(1)(ia) OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT.

¶19

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:40979-DB MFA No. 3228 of 2020

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND

¶23

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶24

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI)

¶25

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant

¶26

and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

¶27

Today, a compromise petition that is signed both by the appellant and the respondent and whose signatures are identified by the learned counsel for the appellant and the respondent respectively has been filed under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

¶28

Along with the aforesaid compromise petition,

¶29

separate affidavits of the appellant and the respondent have been filed.

¶30

We have perused the contents of the compromise petition and the affidavits.

¶31

By means of the aforesaid appeal, the judgment and decree dated 04.12.2019 passed by the III Additional

¶32

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:40979-DB MFA No. 3228 of 2020

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

Principal Judge, Family Court at Bengaluru, has been challenged, whereby the petition filed by the appellant under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955¹ was dismissed.

¶35

The parties are present in the Court and have been identified by their advocates. Photocopies of each of their Aadhaar cards have been submitted by them along with their originals for verification, which we have verified. Their signatures have also been identified by the learned counsel for the respective parties, who are present in the Court.

¶36

In the compromise petition, it has also been prayed jointly for setting aside the judgment and decree dated 04.12.2019 by the III Additional Principal Judge, Family Court at Bengaluru, in Matrimonial Case No.3742/2016.

¶37

The parties as well as their counsel stated that the prayer made in the compromise petition be taken as an application under Section 13B of the Act. However, no such prayer has been made in the aforesaid compromise petition

¶38

1 Act

¶39

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:40979-DB MFA No. 3228 of 2020

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

that would permit us to consider passing any such order for dissolution of marriage on the ground of mutual consent.

¶42

Thereafter, joint application under Section 13B of the Act has been filed by the appellant and the respondent, which is also signed by the respective learned counsel for the appellant and the respondent.

¶43

The aforesaid application is supported by the affidavits of the appellant and the respondent. The application has been perused by us.

¶44

In view of the terms of the compromise petition, since the parties have settled their differences amicably and have resolved to put an end to their marriage as sought for in the aforesaid application under Section 13B of the Act, and that they are not pressing the relief for grant of divorce as per the original petition filed by them under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Act, we deem it fit to accept the compromise petition and allow the application under Section 13-B of the Act.

¶45