Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sunil vs Smt. Teena Through Father Shri Govind ... on 27 November, 2025
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:34590
1 FA-985-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI
ON THE 27th OF NOVEMBER, 2025
FIRST APPEAL No. 985 of 2024
SUNIL
Versus
SMT. TEENA THROUGH FATHER SHRI GOVIND SHARMA
Appearance:
Shri Surendra Kumar Gupta - Advocate for the appellant.
ORDER
Per: Justice Binod Kumar Dwivedi This appeal under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 is preferred against the order dated 07/05/2024 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Indore in RCS HM No.1397/2022, whereby application under Order VII Rule 11 read with Section 151 of CPC filed on behalf of the respondent / wife has been dismissed.
2. It is not in dispute that the appellant was married to the respondent according tot he Hindu rites and customs.
3 . Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in petition even though reference was made under Section 11 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, 'HMA') but contents of Section 12 of HMA were also pleaded, however, ignoring those pleadings merely on the ground that petition has been filed with wrong mention of sections, Family Court has allowed the Signature Not Verified Signed by: TEJPRAKASH VYAS Signing time: 11/28/2025 12:11:01 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:34590 2 FA-985-2024 application filed under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC and petition has been dismissed, which is bad in law. Even otherwise, he had moved an application for amendment but on the very same date without considering the application, petition has been dismissed, therefore, learned counsel prays for allowing this appeal and for setting aside the impugned order by remitting back it to the learned trial Court for permitting the appellant to incorporate the necessary amendment and thereafter, by giving opportunity of leading evidence and hearing, trial Court may be directed to decide the case on merits.
4 . Heard and considered the submission raised at bar by learned counsel for the appellant.
5. From perusal of the record, it appears that even though petition was filed mentioning Section 11 of HMA, but contents of Section 12 were also pleaded. In such circumstances, permission to incorporate necessary amendment should have been allowed.
6 . In the totality of the circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that impugned order passed by the Court below suffers from infirmity and legal error. Hence, it cannot be sustained, therefore, appeal deserves to be and is hereby allowed by setting aside the impugned order dated 07/05/2024 with a direction to the Family Court that application under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC be considered on merits and decide it afresh by giving opportunity to incorporate necessary amendment in the petition and thereafter, after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing, petition be decided on merits.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: TEJPRAKASH VYAS Signing time: 11/28/2025 12:11:01 PMNEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:34590 3 FA-985-2024
7. With the aforesaid, appeal stands allowed and disposed of. Certified copy as per rules.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) (BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE JUDGE
Tej
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TEJPRAKASH
VYAS
Signing time: 11/28/2025
12:11:01 PM