✦ Bombay High Court · 18 Jul 2008

Shilpa Dushyant Kamalgiri v. Dushyant @ Raju Nayan Kamalgiri

Civil Application No. 85 of 2008D B BHOSALE, B H MARLAPALLE

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

Mr. M.S. Karnik for appellant. Mr. Kuldeep Patil i/by Mr. Prashant Badole and Mr.Jeera Joseph for respondent. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE & D.B. BHOSALE,JJ. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE & D.B. BHOSALE,JJ. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE & D.B. BHOSALE,JJ. Dated: July 18, 2008. Dated: July 18, 2008. Dated: July 18, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . We have heard Mr. Karnik the learned counsel for the appellant-wife and we have noticed that the impugned decree of divorce is a consent decree and, therefore, in view of the provisions of Section 19(2) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, an appeal is not maintainable. . Mr. Karnik has invited our attention to the order dated 27/3/2008 passed by the learned Single Judge of this court in Writ Petition No. 1843 of :2:

2008. It appears from the said order that the impugned decree was challenged in Writ Petition No. 1843 of 2008 but when the petition was called out for hearing on admission, it was stated that the instant appeal is pending and, therefore, the learned counsel was permitted to withdraw the petition. . The appellant’s remedy may be somewhere else but certainly this appeal is not maintainable and hence the same is dismissed as such with liberty to the appellant as is available in law. . Civil Application No. 85 of 2008 does not survive and same shall stand disposed as such. (D.B. Bhosale, J.) (D.B. Bhosale, J.) (B.H. Marlapalle,J.) (B.H. Marlapalle,J.) (D.B. Bhosale, J.) (B.H. Marlapalle,J.)

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Family Courts Act, 1984 — s. 19(2).

Which court decided this case, and when?

Bombay High Court, on 18 Jul 2008. The bench was D B BHOSALE, B H MARLAPALLE.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Civil Application No. 85 of 2008). ← Search more judgments