Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 19729 (HP)

AJAY KUMAR v. DHARMA DEVI

CMPMO/330/2026 · 2026-08-05

Virender Singh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:HHC:32754 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.  : 330 of 2026 Decided on    :   05.08.2026 Ajay Kumar …Petitioner Versus Dharma Devi …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner       :  Mr. Naresh Kumar Verma, Advocate. For the respondent    : None. Virender Singh, Judge (Oral) Notice   issued   to   the   respondent,   received   back after due service.  Despite service, no one has put appearance on her behalf.  Further wait is not justifiable. 2. Petitioner­Ajay Kumar, who has filed a petition, under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Mandi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Family Court’), against respondent Dharma Devi, for dissolution of his marriage, by way of a decree of divorce, has filed, the present 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2026:HHC:32754 petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the order dated 29.11.2025, passed by the Family Court. 3. On 29.11.2025, the Family Court has passed the following orders: “ Taken up today for effective  hearing vide separate office order dated 13.11.2025. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that one of the persons whose affidavit was filed has not been cross­examined by the respondent. It is   clarified   that   this   is   not   a   grievance   of   the petitioner. It is noted that only those witnesses who are or were cross­examined shall be read in evidence and mere affidavits on record shall not be of any advantage to either party. The case is already fixed for respondent witnesses (RWs). Being one of the oldest cases, a divorce petition filed in 2021, it is ordered to be taken up on priority. List the matter for RWs on 03.12.2025.” 4. As per the zimni orders, annexed with the petition, the petitioner on 05.09.2025,   produced PW Hem Lata, PW Dharma Devi and PW  Vimal  Kumar (as per learned counsel for the petitioner wrongly recorded as Vinod Kumar) and they have tendered their affidavits, in their examination­in­chief, however, in view of the request made by learned counsel for 3 2026:HHC:32754 the   respondent,   their   cross­examination   was   deferred   for 25.10.2025. 5. On   25.10.2025,   the   Presiding   Officer   of   Family Court was on leave and as per office order dated 18.10.2025, the cases listed on 25.10.2025 were ordered to be listed on 11.11.2025. On   11.11.2025,   cross­examination   of   two witnesses Hem Lata and Yashodanand has been conducted, however, PW Dharma Devi and Vimal Kumar, were neither produced by the petitioner, nor, opportunity has been granted by the Family Court to produce the said witnesses for cross­ examination. On that day, the evidence of the petitioner was closed. Thereafter, the matter was taken up on 29.11.2025, when, the order reproduced above has been passed. 6. Considering   the   fact   that   the   witnesses   were produced, by the petitioner, before the Family Court and those witnesses have tendered their affidavits, the order passed by the Family Court on 11.11.2025, closing the evidence of the petitioner, is not sustainable in the eyes of law. Eventually, the order dated 29.11.2025, is also not sustainable, as, when, the   opportunity   to   produce   the   said   witnesses,   for   cross­ 4 2026:HHC:32754 examination, was not given to the petitioner, then, there was no   occasion     for   the   Family   Court   to   pass   order   dated 29.11.2025. 7. Consequently, the present petition is allowed and the orders dated 11.11.2025 and 29.11.2025 are ordered to be set aside. 8. Petitioner   is   also   directed   to   appear   before   the Family   Court,   on  19th  August,   2026,  at  10.00   a.m.  and produce a copy of this Order before the Family Court. The Family Court is requested to fix a date for cross­examination of PW Dharma Devi and Vimal Kumar and on the date to be fixed,   by   the   Family   Court,   the   petitioner   is   directed   to produce the said witnesses on his self responsibility. Pending   application(s),   if   any,   shall   also   stand disposed of. ( Virender Singh ) August 05, 2026( ps ) Judge