Anupama (Echal) Pukhram vs Mayengbam Suraj Singh
2026 Latest Caselaw 1 Mani

Manipur High Court

Anupama (Echal) Pukhram vs Mayengbam Suraj Singh on 12 January, 2026

Author: Ahanthem Bimol Singh

Bench: Ahanthem Bimol Singh

                                                            1
              Digitally signed by
JOHN      JOHN TELEN KOM
TELEN KOM Date: 2026.01.13
          12:55:15 +05'30'

                                                                                      Sl. No. 3

                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
                                                  AT IMPHAL

                                              Mat. App. No.19 of 2025
                      Anupama (Echal) Pukhram
                                                                                      Appellant
                                                      Vs.

                      Mayengbam Suraj Singh
                                                                                     Respondent

BEFORE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M. SUNDAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH

(ORDER)

(Order of the Court was made by M. Sundar, CJ)

12.01.2026.

[1] Captioned appeal is a statutory appeal under Section 19 of the

'Family Court Act, 1984' ('said Act' for the sake of brevity) assailing

judgment and order dated 06.06.2025 in Matrimonial(R&C)No.8 of 2022,

CNR: MNIW05-000547-2022 on the file of 'Family Court Manipur at

Lamphelpat Imphal' ('said Family Court' for convenience').

[2] To be noted, wife is the appellant before us and husband is

sole respondent.

[3] Mr. Ajoy Pebam, learned counsel for appellant (wife) submits

that in and vide afore-referred '06.06.2025 judgment and order' ('impugned

judgement' for convenience) made by said Family Court, a suit for

restitution of conjugal rights was dismissed but the dismissal was ex-parte.

Learned counsel for appellant submits that said Family Court had come to

the conclusion that the institution of conjugal rights proceedings was

collusive but the restitution suit was filed after a divorce suit by the husband

and therefore, it is not collusive is his say.

[4]           Issue notice.

[5]           Ms. Kh. Saibiya, learned counsel accepts notice for

respondent husband and submits that the impugned judgement deserves

to be sustained and there is no error warranting interference.

[6] Afore-referred and other rival contentions will be considered

when the appeal is taken up.

[7] Registry to requisition entire records from said Family Court

{entire record qua Matrimonial(R&C) Suit No.8 of 2022, CNR; MNIW05-

000547-2022} and put up the same in the next listing which will be on

17.02.2026.

[8]           List on 17.02.2026




                       JUDGE                              CHIEF JUSTICE


John Kom