[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Suryaprasad Tripathy vs Sasmita Ratha on 15 December, 2025
Author: Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo
Bench: Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MATA No. 242 of 2025
Suryaprasad Tripathy .... Appellant
Represented by Adv.-
Mr. Amitav Tripathy, Advocate
-Versus-
Sasmita Ratha .... Respondent
Represented by Adv._
Mr. Panchanan Panigrahi, Advocate
on behalf of Mr. Cheera Ranjan Satapahty, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK
AND
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 15.12.2025
(Hybrid mode)
1. The learned counsels for the parties are present. The
appellant-husband in the marriage is also present. Joint affidavit
filed by the parties is on record.
In the joint affidavit at paragraph-2 the following has been
stated:-
"2.That the conciliation for reunion between the parties
have already been failed."
The statement at paragraph-2 is incorrect, in view of the
fact that no conciliation has ever taken place before this Court.
2. It is submitted by Mr. Tripathy, learned counsel that the
conciliation that took place before the learned Judge, Family
Court, Puri is referred to, prior to the judgment in Civil Proceeding
No.281 of 2021, rejecting the prayer for divorce.
3. At paragraph-9 of the joint affidavit, the following has
been stated: -
"9. That taking into aforesaid facts and circumstances
both the parties prayed before this Hon'ble Court to pass a
decree of divorce on the ground of mutual consent". (sic)
4. In our considered view, the Appellate Court cannot convert
the appellate proceeding challenging a judgment and decree
obtained / rejected under Section-13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act
filed by the husband to another proceeding under Section-13(B) of
the Hindu Marriage Act.
We derive support for our above view from the judgment
dated 08.05.2024 rendered by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in
MATA No. 52 of 2022: Smt. Puspalata Paikaray v. Birajananda
Das (paragraphs-9 & 11), in which one of us (M.S. Sahoo, J.) was
a Member.
5. However, the parties have their option to approach the
learned Trial Court by filing application under Section-13B of the
Hindu Marriage Act supported by affidavit.
6. At this stage, the learned counsel Mr. Tripathy for the
appellant and learned counsel Mr. Panigrahi on behalf of learned
counsel Mr. C.R. Satapathy for the respondent submit that the
parties shall approach the learned Judge, Family Court, Puri under
Section-13B of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking dissolution of
marriage on mutual consent. However, no such application is filed
before this Court seeking any liberty, though joint affidavit was
filed on 3rd September, 2025.
7. In our considered view, as stated on behalf of the parties as
per their agreement stated before us, if any such application is filed
before the learned Judge, Family Court, Puri, the same shall be
dealt with in accordance with law.
We further clarify that in view of the judgment rendered by
Hon'ble Apex Court in Amardeep Singh V. Harveen Kaur; 2017
INSC 896 : AIR 2017 SC 4417 : (2017) 8 SCC 746, the Court
need not wait for the mandatory period to grant the decree of
divorce on mutual consent, without detaining itself to discharge the
duty of reconciliation.
8. It is stated before us by the learned counsel for the parties
that such application shall be filed by 12th January, 2026. The
application shall be taken up by the learned Judge, Family Court,
Puri in accordance with law and dealt with as expeditiously as
possible. The learned Court shall record the statements of the
parties before deciding the matter.
9. List 'For Orders' along with MATA No.02 of 2023 on 27th
January, 2026.
Liberty to mention.
Copy of the order shall be forwarded by the Registry to the
learned Judge, Family Court, Puri.
(Manash Ranjan Pathak)
Judge
(Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo)
Judge
Narayan/Ranjeeta
