Smt.Anuya Anil Patil v. Anil H. Patil
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Family Courts Act, 1984 ss. 19, 19(1)
- Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 s. 13(1)(i)
- Constitution of India art. 227
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. Considering the nature of the order, the bar created by sub section 2 of section 19 will not apply. Hence, a statutory remedy of preferring an appeal u/s 19(1) of the said Act of 1984 is available to the petitioner. Considering the availability of…
Judgment
latter part of the impugned order is merely a consequence of the order on application at Exhibit-22. Moreover, the petitioner is contending that her consent was not voluntary. Her application was for withdrawal of the consent. The very fact of giving a valid consent is being disputed by the petitioner.
Considering the nature of the order, the bar created by sub section 2 of section 19 will not apply. Hence, a statutory remedy of preferring an appeal u/s 19(1) of the said Act of 1984 is available to the petitioner. Considering the availability of a statutory remedy, this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India need not be entertained and the same is rejected by keeping the remedy of the petitioner open. All contentions of the parties on merits are expressly kept open.
(A.S.OKA, J.)
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Family Courts Act, 1984 — ss. 19, 19(1); Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — s. 13(1)(i); Constitution of India — art. 227.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 25 Jun 2007. The bench was A S OKA.
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.