← Library
Bombay High CourtCP/149/2024disposed off as a withdrawn

Mrs. Sonal Umesh Gyanchandani @ Bhakti Nilesh Ailani v. Nilesh S/O. Kishor Ailani

2025-05-05Hon'Ble Shri Justice Anil S. Kilor , Hon'Ble Shri Justice Raj D. Wakode5 pages

(1) 78.can.38.2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION (CAN) NO.38 OF 2025 IN CONTEMPT PETITION NO.149 OF 2024 Sonal Umesh Gyanchandani @ Bhakti Nilesh Ailani Vs.

Nilesh s/o Kishor Ailani -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. P. A. Abhyankar, Counsel for the petitioner. Mr. N. K. Ailani - in person - respondent.

CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.

DATED : 05/05/2025 1.

By this application, the applicant is seeking recall of order passed by this Court on 06.03.2025. 2.

Heard the respondent in person and learned Counsel Mr. Abhyankar for the petitioner in original application.

3.

Earlier application was filed by the present respondent for dismissal of the contempt petition on the premise that cause of action, as mentioned in para 11 has not arose. It is further submitted by the respondent, who appeared in person that pursis filed by the Counsel of the petitioner along with the petition on 7th May 2024, itself suggests that petitioner was predetermined to file instant case, and therefore, most possibly eagerly waiting for time in

(2) 78.can.38.2025 notice to expire, the application is filed. He submitted that the contempt petition is filed at premature stage, and therefore, it is to be dismissed. 4.

After hearing both sides, this Court has observed that on perusal of record there is no dispute as to the fact that the petitioner and the respondent were married on 11.07.2008 and they have been staying separate since March 2015 owing to differences between them. The period since the year 2017 has witnessed number of litigation between the parties one amongst them was pending i.e. Criminal Appeal No.263/2023. Considering the matrimonial dispute between the parties, this Court referred the matter for mediation and by the efforts of the Mediator, the terms were finalized and as per the wishes of the petitioner and respondent, the matter was settled.

As per the terms of said settlement, it was agreed between both parties and both parties shall file a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, for grant of decree and divorce by mutual consent. For the said purpose, both parties shall file a joint petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, on or before 5th February, 2024 before the learned Family Court at Nagpur and shall obtain decree of divorce in order to dissolve their marriage solemnized on 11.07.2008.

(3) 78.can.38.2025 be liable for contempt proceeding and the party aggrieved shall be entitled for status-quo including initiating necessary to legal proceedings before the competent Court of law, for restoration of proceeding which are withdrawn in terms of this agreement. 5.

Thus, in view of the said terms of the agreement, both parties have to file a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1951. The roznama of the Family Court No.3, Nagpur is placed on record which shows that on 23.09.2024 the petition was filed and firstly came before the Family Court and it was referred for the report of the marriage Counsellor thereafter certain objections were raised in the said petition. Petitioner No.1 present before the Court made a statement that on the next, he will remain present and will comply the same. However, after sufficient opportunity, he has not complied, not filed an affidavit and also not signed the petition. On several occasions, this Court as well as the Family Court has directed him to remain present before the Family Court for compliance.

But it is apparent that he has not complied with the same. The order passed by this Court on 30.08.

(4) 78.can.38.2025 Court on 05.09.2024 at 11.00 a.m. for taking appropriate steps to by this petition and to comply with the necessary compliance, but the said compliance was also not complied by the present respondent. It is specifically agreed by both the parties that in case of breach/violation or disobedience of any of the terms of this agreement, the party breaching the terms shall be liable for contempt proceeding and the party aggrieved shall be entitled for status-quo including initiating necessary for legal proceedings. Thus, both the parties were under obligation to comply with the terms and conditions which they have agreed in terms of settlement before the Mediator. Therefore, this Court has observed that it is apparent that it is the respondent who has not complied with the directions. It is further observed that at this stage i.e. at the interim stage it cannot be concluded that there is no contempt and by observing the same the application for the dismissal of the contempt petition is dismissed.

6.

This observation itself suggests that the respondent is at liberty to raise all these objections at the stage of hearing of the contempt petition, but instead of proceeding with the hearing, the present respondent appears to file an application only to prolong the proceeding. As far as the ground raised by him in this application is concerned, there is no error apparent which appears to be there, as this

(5) 78.can.38.2025 Court has observed the above said observations, on the basis of the roznama of the Family Court and the order passed by this Court previously. As there is no error apparent on the record, therefore the application itself is not maintainable, and therefore the same is deserves to be dismissed. In view of that application is dismissed.

CONTEMPT PETITION NO.149 OF 2024 The contempt petition be listed for the framing of the charge after summer vacation.

(URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) Sarkate Signed by: Mr. A.R. Sarkate Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 10/05/2025 15:33:47