[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Smt. Anuradha Dadhich vs Anurag Verma (2026:Rj-Jd:6139) on 3 February, 2026
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2026:RJ-JD:6139]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2383/2026
Smt. Anuradha Dadhich D/o Shri Govind Lal, Aged About 43
Years, R/o Vikramaditya Nagar, Near New Sojat City Police
Station, Sojat City, District Pali, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
Anurag Verma S/o Shri Alok Kumar Verma, R/o C-96, Mahesh
Nagar, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajesh Joshi, Sr. Adv
assisted by Mr. Devesh A Purohit
For Respondent(s) : -
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
03/02/2026
By way of filing the present civil writ petition under Article
226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the
following reliefs:-
"It is, therefore, prayed that your Lordship may
graciously be pleased to accept and allow this writ petition
and by an appropriate writ, order or direction or in the
nature thereof;
(i) The impugned order dated 25.11.2025 (Annex-5)
passed by the learned Family Court No.2, Jodhpur in Civil
Original Suit No.928/2019 (296/2025) titled as [Anurag
Vs. Anuradha may kindly be quashed and set aside.
(ii) Cost of the writ petition may be awarded in favour of
the petitioner.
(iii) Any other order or direction which may be considered
just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case
may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner."
2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent filed an
application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act against the
petitioner before the competent Family Court at Jaipur in the year
(Uploaded on 03/02/2026 at 07:19:41 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:6139] (2 of 5) [CW-2383/2026]
2017 on multiple grounds. Subsequently, the matter was
transferred from the competent Family Court at Jaipur to the
Family Court, Jodhpur, pursuant to the order passed by this Court
dated 28.08.2019.
3. The proceedings initiated by the respondent under Section 9
of the Hindu Marriage Act are presently pending before the Family
Court No.2, Jodhpur. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order
dated 25.11.2025 passed by the learned Family Court No.2,
Jodhpur, whereby the application filed by the respondent under
Order VII Rule 14 CPC for taking the following documents on
record was allowed:
(a) The application for obtaining the marriage certificate between
the petitioner and the respondent filed before the Municipal
Council, Jaipur; and
(b) Photographs of the alleged marriage between the parties.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there was
no sufficient cause for belatedly filing the application for bringing
the documents on record, as the same were admittedly available
with the respondent since the year 2013. It was contended that it
is incumbent upon a party to place on record all relevant
documents within its power and possession at the initial stage of
the proceedings, and failure to do so would debar such party from
producing the documents at a belated stage in the absence of a
satisfactory explanation.
5. Learned counsel further submitted that the marriage
certificate sought to be brought on record has been issued under
the guidelines dated 22.05.2006, whereas after the coming into
force of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009, no marriage
(Uploaded on 03/02/2026 at 07:19:41 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:6139] (3 of 5) [CW-2383/2026]
certificate could have been issued under the said guidelines. It
was also urged that the photographs of the alleged marriage have
been taken on record by the impugned order dated 25.11.2025 in
complete disregard of the fact that in proceedings between the
same parties before the learned ADJ No.6, Jaipur, the said
photographs were not found to be legally effective or enforceable.
Thus, it was argued that the respondent cannot be permitted to
place on record incomplete and fabricated documents which are
not legally enforceable.
6. Learned counsel vehemently submitted that the impugned
order dated 25.11.2025 passed by the learned Family Court No.2,
Jodhpur, allowing the application under Order VII Rule 14 CPC,
neither serves the ends of justice nor assists in resolving the
dispute between the parties. It was further submitted that the
impugned order is ex facie illegal and without jurisdiction, as the
defect goes to the root of admissibility and is not curable by
judicial discretion or directions. On these grounds, learned counsel
prayed for setting aside the impugned order dated 25.11.2025.
7. Heard.
8. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having
perused the material available on record, this Court finds that the
respondent has filed a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu
Marriage Act seeking restitution of conjugal rights. Prima facie, the
documents sought to be produced on record pertain to the
issuance of a marriage certificate between the parties and certain
photographs indicating that the marriage had, in fact, taken place
an assertion which has been categorically denied by the petitioner.
(Uploaded on 03/02/2026 at 07:19:41 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:6139] (4 of 5) [CW-2383/2026]
The documents permitted to be taken on record are yet to be
proved by the respondent in accordance with law.
9. In the opinion of this Court, while deciding an application
under Order VII Rule 14 CPC, the Court has the discretion to
permit the filing of documents at a belated stage if it is prima
facie satisfied that the production of such documents does not
alter the nature of the suit or proceedings and would aid in the fair
and just adjudication of the dispute. Any inconvenience or delay
caused to the opposite party can be suitably compensated.
10. As noticed above, the learned Court below is dealing with
proceedings relating to restitution of conjugal rights, wherein the
petitioner has denied the very factum of marriage. In the
considered opinion of this Court, no prejudice has been caused to
the petitioner, as she shall have full opportunity to cross-examine
the respondent with regard to the said documents, including the
validity of the marriage certificate issued under the guidelines
dated 22.05.2006 after the enforcement of the Rajasthan
Municipalities Act, 2009, as well as the admissibility of the
photographs in the absence of compliance with Section 65-B of
the Indian Evidence Act, at the appropriate stage of the
proceedings.
11. In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court finds no merit
in the present writ petition. The same is accordingly dismissed.
However, considering the fact that the proceedings under Section
9 of the Hindu Marriage Act have been pending before the
competent Family Court for more than five years, the learned
Family Court is directed to make all possible efforts to conclude
the proceedings expeditiously, preferably within a period of six
(Uploaded on 03/02/2026 at 07:19:41 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:6139] (5 of 5) [CW-2383/2026]
months from today. No unnecessary adjournments shall be
granted to either of the parties.
12. All pending applications stand disposed of.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
19-himanshu/-
(Uploaded on 03/02/2026 at 07:19:41 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
