Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Smt. Sunita Devi vs Bajrang (2025:Rj-Jd:19152-Db) on 21 April, 2025
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
[2025:RJ-JD:19152-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1124/2025
Smt. Sunita Devi W/o Shri Bajrang Mundel, Aged About 38
Years, D/o Shri Ramniwasji Jajra R/o Near Parshvathji Temple,
East Gate, Near Bayaji Ki Bordi, Merta Road, Tehsil Merta, Dist.
Nagaur,raj.
----Appellant
Versus
Bajrang S/o Shri Jawaharlal Mundal, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
Br Choudhary Clinic, Nagaur Road, Near Hasiyas Chaurha, Merta
Road, Tehsil Merta, Dist. Nagaur,raj.
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Avinash Acharya
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHAH
Order
21/04/2025
1. The instant appeal has been preferred claiming the following
prayers:-
It is therefore, very humbly prayed that this Hon'ble
Court may kindly be pleased to :-
(i) allow the above Civil Misc. Appeal of the appellant;
(ii) quash and set aside the impugned order dt.
3.1.2025 passed by Learned Judge, Family Court, Merta
in Civil Original Case No.171/2022 in the case of Bajrang
Vs. Sunita Devi and the application filed by the appellant-
respondent under Order 7 Rule 11 R/2 Section 151 CPC,
1908 may kindly be allowed as prayed for.;
(iii) grant such relief/reliefs which in the facts and
circumstances of this case may do complete justice to the
appellant."
[2025:RJ-JD:19152-DB] (2 of 3) [CMA-1124/2025]
2. The appellant and the respondent entered into a wedlock on
28.02.2016. The respondent husband filed an application under
Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the learned Family
Court, Merta, which was dismissed for non-prosecution on
02.11.2023. Further, the respondent husband filed an application
under Order 9 Rule 9 CPC, which was allowed vide order dated
29.08.2024. Thereafter, the appellant filed an application under
Order 7 Rule 11 r/w Section 151 CPC on 14.11.2024, seeking
dismissal of the divorce petition on the ground that the reasons
mentioned in the petition does not provide sufficient ground for
divorce.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant wife
is opposing the divorce petition because, as per her claim, she and
her husband are living under one roof and the divorce petition was
premature. He also submits that a criminal case was filed by the
appellant wife against the respondent husband and the same was
closed on the ground of compromise between the parties. He
further submits that it is a fit case for allowing of the application
under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC.
4. After examining the impugned judgment, this Court finds
that learned Family Court has dealt with the issue of premature
bringing of the divorce petition, even when the fact of desertion is
part of the pleadings. The counter claims regarding the date and
time of the desertion required adjudication as per the learned
Family Court and any summary dismissal under Order 7 Rule 11
CPC was not called for.
4.1. This Court further observes that learned Family Court has
dealt with incomplete mentioning of the provisions of Section 13
[2025:RJ-JD:19152-DB] (3 of 3) [CMA-1124/2025]
of the Hindu Marriage Act, but the same cannot be a ground for
summary dismissal of the divorce petition. Thus, this Court does
not find any infirmity in the impugned order dated 03.01.2025
passed by learned Family Court.
5. Consequently, the instant appeal as well as stay application
stand dismissed.
(SANDEEP SHAH),J (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J
4-nirmala/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
