Bombay High Court
Anjali Bhagwan Nagre & Ors vs Bhagwan Kisanrao Nagre on 11 October, 2017
Bench: T.V. Nalawade
1 FCA 20-06, J.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.20 OF 2006
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6118 OF 2005
Bhagwan S/o Kisanrao Nagre,
Age - 40 years, Occu. Nil,
R/o Jai Bhawani Nagar, CIDCO,
Aurangabad. ... Appellant
Versus
1. Jaishree D/o Bhagwan Nagre,
Age - 12 years, Occu. Nil, (Minor),
2. Bhagyashree D/o Bhagwan Nagre,
Age - 10 years, Occu. Nil, (Minor),
3. Vanashree D/o Bhagwan Nagre,
Age - 8 years, Occu. Nil, (Minor),
Through guardian -
Anjali D/o Hiraman Kamble,
Age - 33 years, Occu. Service,
R/o Bhimpura, Near Osmanpura,
Aurangabad. ... Respondents
...
Mr. R.R.Sancheti h/f Mr. R.R.Mantri, Adv. for Appellant
Mrs. Swati S. Langote, Adv. for Respondent Nos.1 to 3
...
WITH
FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.
2
OF 200
8
1. Anjali W/o Bhagwan Nagre,
Age - 34 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o Bhimpura, Near osmanpura,
Aurangabad.
::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2017 01:56:29 :::
2 FCA 20-06, J.odt
2. Jaishree D/o Bhagwan Nagre,
Age - 12 years, Occu. Minor,
U/g of mother - appellant No.1.
3. Bhagyashree D/o Bhagwan Nagre,
Age - 10 years, Occu. Occu. Minor,
U/g of mother - appellant No.1.
4. Vanashree D/o Bhagwan Nagre,
Age - 8 years, Occu. Minor,
s
U/g of mother - appellant No.1. ... Appellant
Versus
Bhagwan Kisanrao Nagre,
Age - 41 years, Occu. Business,
R/o Jaibhawaninagar, CIDCO,
Aurangabad. ... Respondent
...
Mrs. Swati S. Langote, Advocate for Appellant Nos.1 to 4
Mr.R.R.Sancheti h/f Mr.R.R.Mantri, Adv. for Respondent
...
CORAM : T.V.NALAWADE AND
ARUN M. DHAVALE, JJ.
DATED : 11th October, 2017
ORAL JUDGMENT :-
1. The proceeding is filed to challenge the Judgment
and Decree of Hindu Marriage Petition No. B-26 of 2003,
which was pending before Principal Judge of Family
Court, Aurangabad. The said proceeding was filed by
3 FCA 20-06, J.odt
the appellant for declaration that the marriage between
him and Respondent - Smt. Anjali is null and void. The
Family Court has given the decree. He wanted one more
declaration that the children born to Anjali are not born
from him i.e. he was challenging the paternity in respect
of Respondent Nos.2 to 4. Finding is given against him
on that point and so he has filed the appeal. Other
Appeal No.2 of 2008 is filed against the same decision
by Anjali as her marriage with Respondent of Appeal
No.2 of 2008 is declared null and void.
2. The learned counsel for Anjali, during argument,
submitted that in view of subsequent developments the
appellant is not at all interested in challenging the
decision of declaration that the marriage is null and
void. It appears that the husband was able to prove
that his first wife was alive when he came in contact
with Anjali. Learned Counsel for Anjali submitted that
Respondent No.2 of Appeal No.20 of 2006 is married.
3. The learned counsel for husband Bhagwan
submitted that the respondents to whom maintenance
4 FCA 20-06, J.odt
is granted in proceeding filed under Section 125 of the
Criminal Procedure Code are married and by misusing
the finding that they are the children of Bhagwan, they
will continue to get the maintenance and they will not
admit that they are married. The submissions made
and the record show that, the husband had applied for
DNA Test, but he could not succeed in it. The co-
habitation was proved and so the Trial Court has
refused the decree giving declaration that the children
are not born from him. It appears that one of the three
issues of Anjali is now married. Learned counsel for
Bhagwan submitted that one more daughter is also
married. In that case, it will be open to him to file an
application for cancellation of maintenance order in
respect of that respondent-daughter, who is now
married. As such step is possible, there is no need to go
into the details of the evidence and the husband can
achieve the relief by filing appropriate proceeding like
the proceeding for cancellation for maintenance order
made in favour of daughter, who is now married.
5 FCA 20-06, J.odt
4. With these observations, both the appeals stand
dismissed. Civil Application disposed of.
(ARUN M. DHAVALE, J.) (T.V.NALAWADE, J.)
...
vmk/-
