[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Priyanka Yadav vs Ajay Yadav on 20 March, 2026
Author: Hirdesh
Bench: Hirdesh
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9831
1 MA-2251-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIRDESH
ON THE 20th OF MARCH, 2026
MISC. APPEAL No. 2251 of 2026
PRIYANKA YADAV
Versus
AJAY YADAV
Appearance:
Shri Anand Vinod Bhardwaj - Advocate for appellant.
ORDER
The instant miscellaneous appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(a) of CPC
read with Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, has been filed by the
appellant-wife assailing the order dated 23.02.2026 passed by District Judge,
Vidisha in MJC No. 04 of 2026, whereby the application under Section 13 of
the Hindu Marriage Act filed by the appellant was returned for presentation
before a Court of competent jurisdiction.
2. Challenging the impugned order, learned counsel for the appellant
contends that the marriage was solemnized on 23.05.2013 at Kurwai, District
Vidisha, and the appellant was residing at the same location at the time of
filing the petition. It is submitted that the learned Trial Court failed to
appreciate Section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which is a special
enactment that overrides the general provisions of Section 20 of CPC. Since
the marriage was solemnized and the appellant-wife resides within the local
limits of Kurwai, the District Court at Vidisha possesses the requisite
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9831
2 MA-2251-2026
territorial jurisdiction under Section 19(i) and (iii-a) of the Hindu Marriage
Act. Thus, the return of the petition on the grounds of jurisdiction is legally
unsustainable.
3. Looking to the nature of the case, there is no need to issue notice to
the respondent-husband at this stage.
4. Provisions of Section 19 (i) and (iii-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act
read as under:-
"19. Court to which petition shall be presented - Every petition
under this Act shall be presented to the district court within the
local limits of whose ordinary original civil jurisdiction-
(i) the marriage was solemnized, or
xxxxxxxx
(iii-a) in case the wife is the petitioner, where she is residing on the
date of presentation of petition, or
xxxxxx"
5. After considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the
appellant and perusing the record, this Court is of the opinion that the Trial
Court has committed a patent error in returning the petition. The Trial Court
erroneously applied the general provisions of Section 20 of CPC regarding
the residence, while completely overlooking the special provisions of Section
19 of Hindu Marriage Act. Since appellant-wife has specifically pleaded that
the marriage was solemnized within the territorial jurisdiction of District
Vidisha (Kurwai) and she was residing at Kurwai on the date of presentation
of petition, the petition is maintainable before the District Court, Vidisha as
per provisions of Section 19(i) and Section 19(iii-a) of the Hindu marriage
Act. The special enactment governs the field of matrimonial disputes and
overrides general procedural law in matters of jurisdiction.
6. Consequently, the impugned order dated 23.02.2026 is hereby set
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9831
3 MA-2251-2026
aside. The matter is remanded back to the Trial Court with a direction to
register the case at its original number and proceed with the matter in
accordance with the law.
7. The appeal is allowed. No order as to costs.
8. Certified copy as per rules.
(HIRDESH)
JUDGE
MKB
