Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:107383 Court No. - 9 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6272 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt. Seema Srivastava Respondent :- Anand Srivastava And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Sumit Daga Counsel for Respondent :- Siddharth Srivastava Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 15.5.2025 passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Prayagraj rejecting the application filed by the defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. By the order impugned, plaintiff has been permitted to amend the plaint petition by adding a paragraph mentioning exact date of cause of action. 3. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that Principal Judge, Family Court, Prayagraj has erred in law in rejecting the application filed by the petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. 4. From perusal of the application filed for divorce, it is apparent that there is no averment in the application that when cause of action arose to the plaintiff and therefore, the application itself was not maintainable for the want of cause of action. 5. It has been further contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that Principal Judge, Family Court has erroneously permitted the applicant/respondent no. 1 to amend the application. 6. I have perused the application filed by the applicant/respondent no. 1 for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act and from bare reading of the application it is apparent that averment regarding cause of action has been made in the aforesaid application. Cause of action is nothing but bundle of facts and the same are pleaded by the applicant/respondent no.1 in his application under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Merely, the applicant have not averted in the paragraph as to when cause of action arose for filing the divorce petition. 7. Since there is no limitation provided for filing of divorce petition after the cause of action arose, the want of said averment is of no consequence. 8. In view of the same, no illegality has been committed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Prayagraj in passing the order impugned. 9. The petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 8.7.2025 Rishabh [Manish Kumar Nigam, J.] Digitally signed by :- RISHABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RISHABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad