Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Mamta Sharma vs Ankit on 28 October, 2025
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:31131
1 FA-115-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ALOK AWASTHI
ON THE 28th OF OCTOBER, 2025
FIRST APPEAL No. 115 of 2024
SMT. MAMTA SHARMA
Versus
ANKIT
Appearance:
Shri Lakhan Singh Panwar - Advocate for the petitioner.
ORDER
Per: Justice Alok Awasthi
1. This is an appeal under Section 28 of the Family Court Act, 1984
filed by the appellant / wife against the judgment and decree of divorce dated
19.07.2023 passed by IInd District Judge, Dr. Ambedkar Nagar, District
Indore (M.P.), whereby application under Section 13(A) of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") filed by appellant
for dissolution of marriage has been dismissed.
2. Facts of the case is brief are that the appellant and respondent
entered into a wedlock on 16.01.2011 at Mhow, Indore and out of the said
wedlock, the wife gave birth of a son namely Yuvraj, who is currently
residing with the appellant. According to the appellant/wife, the
respondent/husband is a drug addict and under the influence of drugs, he is
used to beat the appellant/wife. The respondent was admitted to De-addiction
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:31131
2 FA-115-2024
and Rehabilitation Center for six months and after returning from center in
the month of December 2021, he stayed well for a month, thereafter, again
started the same act with appellant and his child, which caused severe
injuries to the appellant, hence, he was again admitted to De-addiction
Center at Indore. A complaint was also filed by the appellant on 05.12.2021
at Police Station Hanumanganj, Bhopal. Thereafter, on 06.12.2022, the
appellant filled a suit against the respondent seeking divorce on the grounds
of cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
3. The learned Family Court has framed the issues and after
considering each and every aspect of the case, passed the ex-parte judgment
and decree dated 19.07.2023.
4. Shri Lakhan Singh Panwar, counsel for the petitioner submits that
the impugned order passed by the learned trial Court is contrary to the law
and facts. In para 9 of the judgment, learned Family Court has stated that
neither the marriage card nor the marriage certificate has been filed by the
appellant and in the Aadhar Card of the appellant, her name has been
mentioned as "Mamta Negi", whereas the marriage was solemnized on
16.01.2011, in spite of that, name in the Aadhar Card has not been
changed/updated. However, as per the documents available on record like
photographs of marriage, Aadhar Card of appellant, admission receipts and
fee receipts of child, respondent rehabilitation center admission card, the
name of appellant is mentioned as Mamta Sharma W/o Ankit Sharma. He
also submits that the appellant is a victim of cruelty. Learned Family Court
has erred while considering the complaint made by the appellant against
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:31131
3 FA-115-2024
respondent. He further submits that the appellant sent a legal notice and even
the paper publication was done, but the respondent never approached the
Family Court nor interested in maintaining appellant and their child. Hence,
ex-parte order has been passed. On these grounds, he prayed to set aside the
impugned judgment.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the
rival submissions.
6. So far as the issue issue No.1 is concerned, learned Family Court
has held that the appellant has not submitted her marriage card and marriage
certificate. Even perusal of the Aadhar Card (Exhibit P-6) of the appellant
shows that the name of the appellant is Mamta Negi R/o Puran Singh Negi,
130, Shri Hari Nagar, Mahugaon, Mhow, Indore, whereas the marriage of the
appellant took place on 16.01.2011. But till date, no change has been made
in the Aadhar Card to update her name and address of the husband. It has
further been mentioned that neither the birth certificate, Aadhar card nor
school mark sheet of son Yuvraj has been submitted, which can show that
the respondent Ankit Sharma is the husband of the appellant. Therefore, on
the basis of evidence and documents, learned Trial Court has not found that
the appellant was married to the respondent and appellant is the wife of
respondent, but in stead of those documents, the appellant has filed her Aadhar
Card before marriage having No. 3578 7184 4080, the same was updated later on
and name of appellant was mentioned as "Mamta Sharma", copy of Sukanya
Samriddhi Account, in which name of the appellant was mentioned as "Mamta
Sharma, copy of NCR registered at Hanumanganj, District Bhopal, in which,
name of the appellant was mentioned as complainant "Mamta Sharma",
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:31131
4 FA-115-2024
respondent's admission & discharge form at De-addition and Rehabilitation
Center, in which, name of the appellant was mentioned as wife "Mamta Sharma"
and also submitted photographs of marriage. It is unearthed from the aforesaid
document that the appellant is the wife of the respondent-Ankit Sharma. Falling
the change the father's name on appellant's Aadhar Card does not prevent her
from proving her marriage in a matrimonial case. The law recognizes multiple
forms of evidence to establish a marital relationship, and the Aadhar Card is not
the sole proof of marriage.
7. In so far as the documents related to the child Yuvraj is concerned, a
copy receipt of tuition fee dated 21.08.022, 10.09.2022 and receipt of BYJU's
dated 23.10.2021 have been submitted by the appellant, in all said receipt, father's
name of child Yuvraj, has been mentioned as Ankit Sharma and in place of
mother's name, name of appellant-Mamta Sharma has been mentioned.
8. We must first address another aspect to determine the true nature of the
dispute that the appellant filed an application under Section 13(A) of the Act
before the Family Court, Indore on the ground of cruelty and in the said
application, it was prayed to pass judgment and decree with regard to dissolution
of marriage solemnized between appellant and respondent on 16.01.2011, the
appellant be granted alimony of Rs.50,00,000/- including streedhan & other
goods, but in the above application, neither any prayer regarding custody of child
was made nor any prayer for entitlement of maintenance of the child was made,
but in absence of any prayer related to the child Yuvraj, learned Family Court has
given its findings that no documents have been submitted by the appellant
regarding Child Yuvraj. If the appellant wanted to make any relief to the child,
she could specifically mention prayer and also she could implead the child as
party.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:31131
5 FA-115-2024
9. That apart, to determine the other issue, the same cannot be
answered as positive. The same is also required fresh adjudication after
hearing both parties.
10. From the above discussion and analysis of the record available, we
are of the considered opinion that, the learned Family Court has committed
error in passing the impugned judgement. The impugned judgment and
decree dated 19.07.2023 passed in RCSHM No. 140/2022 by IInd District
Judge, Dr. Ambedkar Nagar, Indore cannot be sustained and is hereby
quashed. The decree be drawn accordingly.
11. The matter is remanded back to the Family Court to pass fresh
judgment on the basis of pleadings and fresh evidence of both parties. It goes
without saying that while considering said application, proper opportunity to
the respondent shall be granted.
12. Both parties are at liberty to file oral as well as documentary
evidence, if required, before the Family Court.
13. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (ALOK AWASTHI)
JUDGE JUDGE
Vindesh
