Naveen Kumar v. Savita

Delhi High Court · 10 Mar 2023 · 2023:DHC:1804-DB
Sanjeev Sachdeva; Vikas Mahajan
MAT.APP.(F.C.) 57/2023
2023:DHC:1804-DB
family appeal_allowed Significant

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court held that the Family Court at Delhi had territorial jurisdiction to entertain the divorce petition since the parties last resided together and the respondent resides in Delhi, setting aside the order returning the petition for lack of jurisdiction.

Full Text
Translation output
N.C.No. 2023/DHC/001804
MAT.APP.(F.C.) 57/2023
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
JUDGMENT
delivered on: 10.03.2023
MAT.APP.(F.C.) 57/2023
NAVEEN KUMAR ..... Appellant
versus
SAVITA ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Appellant: Mr Manu Sishodia, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr Chander Prakash, Advocate.
CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Mr Chander Prakash, learned counsel enters appearance for the respondent.

2. Appellant impugns order dated 03.02.2023 whereby the Family Court has returned the petition on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction. The Family Court has held that since the marriage was solemnized in Noida the petition would not be maintainable in the courts at Delhi.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that on account of an error it was mentioned in the divorce petition that marriage was solemnized at Delhi, however, the marriage was solemnized at Noida.

4. He submits that the courts at Delhi would continue to have territorial jurisdiction to entertain the petition as the parties last resided N.C.No. 2023/DHC/001804 MAT.APP.(F.C.) 57/2023 together at Delhi and respondent is presently residing in Delhi.

5. It is stated on behalf of the appellant that the parties last resided together as husband and wife in property bearing house no.5762, Gali No.6, New Chandrawal, Jawahar Nagar, Delhi-110007 and infact parties continue to reside therein though in different portions of the building.

6. We notice that the Family Court has referred to Section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which itself stipulates that the petition can be presented to the district court within the local limits of which, inter alia (i) the marriage was solemnised; (ii) respondent at the time of presentation of the petition resides; and (iii) parties to the marriage last resided together.

7. It is not disputed by the learned counsel for the respondent that the respondent-wife resided at Delhi and it is also not disputed that they have last resided together as husband and wife at Delhi.

8. Clearly the Family Court has erred in returning the petition on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction.

9. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 03.02.2023 is set aside.

10. Petition is restored to its original number on the record of the Family Court. Parties shall appear before the Family Court for directions on 10.04.2023.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. VIKAS MAHAJAN, J. MARCH 10, 2023