Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Rakesh Kumar Vs Ramrati — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Home
Punjab & Haryana HC
2025
Rakesh Kumar Vs RamratiRakesh Kumar v. Ramrati

Dismissed¶18

Rakesh Kumar v. Ramrati

Punjab & Haryana HC8 May 2025FAO/1597/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

First Appeal (FAO No.1597 of 2025) decided 08.05.2025 by High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh (Sanjeev Prakash Sharma J., oral judgment; Meenakshi I. Mehta J. on bench). Appellant-husband Rakesh Kumar challenged the Family Court Sirsa decree under Section 9 Hindu Marriage Act 1955 in favour of respondent-wife Ramrati, arguing a pending Section 13 divorce petition (cruelty and desertion) at Rajgarh, District Churu, Rajasthan. Appeal dismissed: wife's Section 9 proceedings prior in time; wife found ready to rejoin matrimonial home; pending Section 13 petition not sufficient ground to set aside Section 9 decree. Obiter observations: no animus deserendi against wife, constructive desertion by husband, Section 23 bar. Counsel: Sushil Kumar Verma for appellant.

What did the court decide?

The appellant's contention that the pendency of his Section 13 Divorce Petition justifies setting aside the Section 9 decree is wholly misconceived.

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the judgment dated 07.02.2025 of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Sirsa, granting a decree under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in favour of the respondent-wife, should be set aside. +2 more

Court's answer

The appellant's contention that the pendency of his Section 13 Divorce Petition justifies setting aside the Section 9 decree is wholly misconceived.

Ratio / Principle

The respondent-wife's Section 9 proceedings were prior in time to the appellant-husband's Section 13 petition filed at Rajgarh.

Key takeaways

The Divorce Petition under Section 13, though pending, cannot be accepted to be a sufficient ground to set aside the decree passed under Section 9 of the Act, 1955.ratio¶18
A finding of fact shows the respondent-wife was always ready to join the matrimonial home but was forced and thrown away from it; despite registering a complaint against her in-laws, she remains interested in joining back her matrimonial home and restoring her marriage.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

FAO dismissed — Punjab & Haryana High Court upholds the decree under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 granted by Principal Judge, Family Court, Sirsa (07.02.2025) directing the husband to restore matrimonial ties. The pendency of the husband's Section 13 Divorce Petition (cruelty and desertion) at Rajgarh, Rajasthan was held insufficient to set aside the Section 9 decree, the wife's Section 9 proceedings being prior in time and a finding recording her continued readiness to rejoin the matrimonial home. Without deciding the point, the Court observed absence of animus deserendi against the wife, constructive desertion by the husband, and a Section 23 bar to any divorce decree.

A

141

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

FAO No.1597 of 2025 Date of Decision: 08.05.2025

Rakesh Kumar

…Appellant

Versus

Ramrati

…Respondent

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA

Present:Mr. Sushil Kumar Verma, Advocate, for the appellant.

SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA J.(Oral)

This is an appeal assailing the judgment dated 07.02.2025 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Sirsa, whereby a decree under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, ‘the Act, 1955’) has been granted in favour of the respondent-wife with direction to the petitioner-husband to restore the matrimonial ties.

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant-husband submits that the appellant-husband has filed a Divorce Petition under Section 13 of the Act, 1955 relating to the ground of cruelty and desertion before the Court at Rajgarh, District Churu, State of Rajasthan and therefore, the present judgment passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Sirsa, deserves to be set-aside.

We are afraid that the contentions is wholly mis-conceived and it is an admitted position that the proceedings initiated by the respondent-

SEEMA SHARMA 2025.05.09 15:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

FAO No.1597 of 2025 -2-

wife under Section 9 of the Act, 1955 were prior in time to the petition filed under Section 13 of the Act, 1955 at Rajgarh. That apart, a finding fact has arrived at to show that the respondent-wife was always ready to join the matrimonial home but was forced and thrown away from her matrimonial home. In spite thereto, while she of course registered a complaint against her in-laws, she is interested to join back her matrimonial home and restore her marriage. On the other hand, we find that the appellant-husband has taken a plea of desertion in the Divorce Petition. In view of the instant petition filed by the respondent-wife, animus deserendi is not true as against her and it is a clear case of constructive desertion on the part of the appellant-husband as against his wife (respondent) and on the said plea, Divorce Petition though pending, cannot be accepted to be sufficient ground to set-aside the present decree passed under Section 9 of the Act, 1955 as the appellant-husband would be guilty of his own acts and under Section 23 of the Act, 1955, the same would be a bar to grant a decree of divorce. We of course would not go into the said aspect and made the afore-said observations as the same would be suffice to dismiss the instant appeal and accordingly, the appeal in hand is dismissed.

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE

May 08, 2025 (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) seema JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No

SEEMA SHARMA 2025.05.09 15:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

Issues for consideration

3 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the judgment dated 07.02.2025 of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Sirsa, granting a decree under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in favour of the respondent-wife, should be set aside.¶13
The court held
The appellant's contention that the pendency of his Section 13 Divorce Petition justifies setting aside the Section 9 decree is wholly misconceived.ratio¶15
2.
Whether the pendency of the appellant-husband's Divorce Petition under Section 13 of the Act, 1955 (grounds of cruelty and desertion) at Rajgarh, District Churu, Rajasthan is a sufficient ground to set aside the Section 9 decree.¶14
The court held
The respondent-wife's Section 9 proceedings were prior in time to the appellant-husband's Section 13 petition filed at Rajgarh.ratio¶18
3.
Whether the respondent-wife's conduct amounts to desertion (animus deserendi) or whether there is constructive desertion on the part of the appellant-husband.¶18
The court held
A finding of fact shows the respondent-wife was always ready to join the matrimonial home but was forced and thrown away from it; despite registering a complaint against her in-laws, she remains interested in joining back her matrimonial home and restoring her marriage.ratio¶18

Statutes considered

4 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955Section 9¶13 Section 13¶14 Section 9¶18 Section 23¶18

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Judgment granting a decree under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in favour of the respondent-wife with direction to the petitioner-husband to restore the matrimonial ties.¶13
Principal Judge, Family Court, Sirsa · 07.02.2025
Prior proceeding
Appellant-husband filed a Divorce Petition under Section 13 of the Act, 1955 on grounds of cruelty and desertion before the Court at Rajgarh, District Churu, State of Rajasthan (stated to be pending).¶14
Prior proceeding
The respondent-wife's proceedings under Section 9 of the Act, 1955 were initiated prior in time to the husband's Section 13 petition at Rajgarh.¶18

Parties & counsel

AI extract

appellant
Rakesh Kumar¶4
Sushil Kumar Verma
respondent
Ramrati¶7

Coram

AI extract

Sanjeev Prakash Sharmaauthor¶12
Meenakshi I. Mehtamember¶9

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Punjab & Haryana HC
Decided on: 8 May 2025 · May
Registered: 7 Mar 2025
Case no.: FAO/1597/2025
CNR: PHHC010379212025
Topic: Matrimonial and Divorce
Bench: Sanjeev Prakash Sharma Meenakshi I. Mehta
Disposal: DISMISSED
Case type: FAO

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Sanjeev Prakash Sharma Meenakshi I. Mehta

Union Territory, Chandigarh and Others Vs Sakshi Malik and Others
7 May 2025
Radhey Shyam and Others Vs State of Haryana and Another
7 May 2025
Sadhu Ram and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others
7 May 2025
Roshan Grag Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1, Chandigarh
8 May 2025
Davendra Kumar Dhama Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Others
8 May 2025
Monika Choudhary Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 1(3) Faridabad and Others
8 May 2025

Cite this judgement

Rakesh Kumar v. Ramrati, FAO/1597/2025 (P&H), decided on 8 May 2025.

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes4

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955Section 9 · Section 13 · Section 9 · Section 23

View all statutes

Procedural history3

Judgment granting a decree under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in favour of the respondent-wife with direction to the petitioner-husband to restore the matrimonial ties.Principal Judge, Family Court, Sirsa · 07.02.2025
Appellant-husband filed a Divorce Petition under Section 13 of the Act, 1955 on grounds of cruelty and desertion before the Court at Rajgarh, District Churu, State of Rajasthan (stated to be pending).
The respondent-wife's proceedings under Section 9 of the Act, 1955 were initiated prior in time to the husband's Section 13 petition at Rajgarh.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Meenakshi I. Mehta

Parties & counsel

Observation (expressly not gone into by the Court): animus deserendi is not true as against the respondent-wife; it is a clear case of constructive desertion on the part of the appellant-husband.

obiter¶18

View all holdings →