Allowed

Pinki Das v. Manoj Kumar Das

Orissa HC3 Apr 2025MATA/245/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Wife appealed against a Family Court decree of judicial separation in husband's divorce suit. The High Court held that since the same grounds apply to Sections 10 and 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act and divorce was refused, judicial separation could not be granted without special reasons, and set aside the judgment and decree.

What did the court decide?

Impugned Family Court judgment dated 15.11.2022 and decree of judicial separation set aside; appeal allowed; delay condoned.

Pinki Das Vs Manoj Kumar Das — Matrimonial and Divorce | Orissa HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

MATA No.245 of 2024

¶3

Pinki Das

¶4

…. Appellant Mr. A.C. Behera, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

Manoj Kumar Das

¶7

…. Respondent Mr. R.K. Prusty, Advocate

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH

ORDER

03.04.2025

Order No.

Heard Mr. A.C. Behera, learned counsel for the AppellantWife and Mr. R.K. Prusty, learned counsel for the RespondentHusband.

¶15

Though this appeal has been listed under the heading “For Orders”, but on the request of the parties, the same is taken up for final hearing.

¶16

Before proceeding in the appeal on merit, we condone the delay in filing the appeal considering the grounds stated by the Wife in the limitation petition and the fact that she has not been paid any amount of maintenance.

¶17

Present appeal is directed against the impugned judgment dated 15.11.2022 of the learned Judge, Family Court, Puri in C.P. No.116 of 2020.

¶18

The Husband has filed the application before the learned Judge, Family Court, Puri under Section 13(1) of the Hindu

¶19

Signature Not Verified

¶20

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 04-Apr-2025 12:02:34

¶21

Page 1 of 3

¶22

Marriage Act praying for decree of divorce by dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty and desertion. Learned Judge, Family Court, Puri while holding that such grounds of cruelty and desertion as asserted by the Husband has not been proved on record, has granted the decree of judicial separation between the parties. We feel it appropriate to re-produce here the relevant observations of the learned Judge, Family Court, Puri.

¶23

“8. As earlier discussed, the petitioner is unable to plead and prove that the respondent is responsible for the estrangement between the parties. He has further failed to plead and prove any specific reason which had created a crack in the marriage between the parties, right from its dispute, though the respondent and petitioner/husband has been living separately, which cannot be said that he was deserted by the respondent/wife. Apart from that, as earlier discussed, the petitioner has failed to plead and prove that he has been deserted for a continuous period of two years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition and the respondent has ever treated him with cruelty.

¶24

In the instant case as earlier discussed, from allegations and evidence there did not seem to be any serious dispute as such between the parties for reconciliation, but at the same time it appeared that both of them were not in a mood to reconcile their differences. This Court already held that the ground of divorce on cruelty and desertion on the part of the respondent are trifling and is not proved. The allegations made by the petitioner though could not amount to cruelty and desertion as to claim a decree for divorce, but considering the circumstances of the case and allegation, this Court is of opinion that a decree of a judicial separation instead of divorce to give an opportunity to patch up if possible, so far they have not patched up is warranted. Hence, ordered.”

¶25

Signature Not Verified

¶26

Page 2 of 3

¶27

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 04-Apr-2025 12:02:34

¶28

We need to emphasize here that the grounds for judicial separation under Section 10 and divorce under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act are same. Thus we fail to appreciate that when learned Family Judge found the grounds for decree of divorce are failed, then how he could satisfy himself for grant of decree of judicial separation? The observations of learned Judge, Family Court, Puri as re-produced above are quite unsatisfactory that when he declined to entertain the grounds for grant of decree of divorce, at the same time he agreed for grant of judicial separation without giving any special reason. Such approach on the part of the learned Judge, Family Court, Puri is found illegal and in contravention of the provisions of law. As such, we are inclined to set aside the impugned judgment and decree of judicial separation

¶29

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment and decree are set aside.

¶30

An urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶31

(B.P. Routray) Judge

¶32

(Chittaranjan Dash) Judge

¶33

B.K. Barik

¶34

Signature Not Verified

¶35

Page 3 of 3

¶36

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 04-Apr-2025 12:02:34

Pinki Das v. Manoj Kumar Das

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pinki Das v. Manoj Kumar Das

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

Sandhya Rani Sahoo @ Mohanty Vs Anusaya Mohanty

Gurunath Sahu Vs Sumati Sahu

Gurunath Sahu Vs Sumati Sahu and Anr.

Jasmin Dash Vs Sujit Dash

Debabrata Debadarsan Palei Vs Subhakanti Patra

State of Orissa Vs Rajendra Nayak