1 2025:CGHC:46439-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR FA(MAT) No. 245 of 2025 Smt. Alka Divakar W/o Shri Ashish Kumar Dewagan, aged about 31 years R/o Qtr. No. 1540, Ward No. 07, Ring Road No. 02, Panna Nagar, In Front of Parijat Castle Police Station Civil Lines Bilaspur District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Appellant Plaintiff Versus Ashish Kumar Dewangan S/o Shri Shobharam Dewangan, aged about 35 years, R/o Ramkrishna Nagar, Mopka Police Station Sarkanda Tahsil and District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent Defendant For Appellant : Mr. Akath Kumar Yadav, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Ashutosh Trivedi, Advocate. Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey, J. Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J. Order on Board Per Rajani Dubey, J. 11.09.2025 1. Heard on admission. Digitally signed by RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU 2 2. At the very outset learned counsel for the appellant submits that the decree of divorce dated 04.01.2025 vide Annexure A/01 passed by the learned Family Court had been obtained by the parties on mutual basis, but after passing the decree of divorce, the appellant and the respondent along with their colleagues visited Mathura on 11.03.2025 to 15.03.2025 and both the parties have continuously organized the annual marriage anniversary even after passing the decree of divorce and he filed photographs and reservation tickets vide Annexure A/04 and Annexure A/05 respectively. He further submits that the appellant is continuously transferring the funds from her account to defendant even after passing of decree of divorce and the same is evident from the account statements of the appellant/plaintiff vide Annexure A/06. As such, the impugned judgment and decree is liable to be set aside. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that this appeal is not maintainable and the same is liable to be dismissed. 4. Reliance has been placed on this Court’s order dated 04.08.2023 in the matter of Abhinav Shrivastav v. Smt. Akasnsha Shrivastav passed in FA (MAT) No. 209 of 2023. 5. We have heard both the counsel for the respective parties. 6. Perusal of the judgment and decree would show that the impugned decree under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been passed between the parties on an application filed on 09.12.2024 and the orders were passed on 04.01.2025. It is 3 also clear from the record that the parties have filed application on the same day i.e., 09.12.2024 for waiving off the cooling period of 06 months on this ground that they are living separately since August, 2022 and between them there is no cohabitation. The learned trial Court after recording the statements of both the parties waived off the cooling period and passed the impugned judgment and decree under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 after considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 7. This Court in the matter of Abhinav Shrivastav (supra) held in paras 3 & 4 which reads as thus:- “3. This appeal has been filed under Section 19(2) of the Family Courts Act, 1984(for short ‘the Act1984’). Sub- section(2) of Section 19 of the Act 1984 bars such an appeal when a decree is passed with the consent of the parties, which reads as under: “19. (2) No appeal shall lie from a decree or order passed by the Family Court with the consent of the parties [or from an order passed under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974); Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to any appeal pending before a High Court or any order passed under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) before the commencement of the Family Courts (Amendment) Act, 1991]”. 4 4. In view of such fact, the appeal is not maintainable and the same is dismissed at the admission stage itself.” 8. In the light of above, it is clear that the appeal filed by the appellant is not maintainable. As such the appeal is dismissed at the admission stage itself. Sd/- Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Judge U. K. Raju