YOGESH AMRUTBHAI PATELversusHANSABEN YOGESHBHAI PATEL D/O AMRUTBHAI PATEL

       C/FA/3246/2024                               ORDER DATED: 02/07/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                      R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3246 of 2024
                                    With
                CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2024
                     In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3246 of 2024
==========================================================
                   YOGESH AMRUTBHAI PATEL
                            Versus
         HANSABEN YOGESHBHAI PATEL D/O AMRUTBHAI PATEL
==========================================================
Appearance:
JAY J JANI(9303) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR NIRAD D BUCH(4000) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MRS. BHAVINI N. BUCH(5403) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
           and
           HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI

                                Date : 02/07/2026

                             ORAL ORDER
              (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA)

1.      We have heard learned counsel Mr. Jay Jani and Mr. Nirad Buch
        for the respective parties.


2.      With the consent of learned counsel, this appeal is taken up for its
        final adjudication.


3.      This First Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated
        21.08.2024 passed by the learned Family Court, Kadi, Mehsana,
        whereby, the suit for divorce filed under Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib)
        by the appellant husband came to be dismissed on the preliminary
        ground of limitation.


4.      Mr. Jay Jani, learned advocate while assailing the judgment and
        decree has submitted that, the trial Court has committed an error of

                                      Page 1 of 3
     C/FA/3246/2024                               ORDER DATED: 02/07/2026




      law while dismissing the suit, as no issue of the maintainability of
      the suit has been framed; if the Family Court would have intend to
      dismiss the suit on the ground of limitation, then, the Court would
      not have determined the other grounds for the divorce; even the
      findings on the other grounds are not based on the evidence. In
      such circumstances, it is submitted that, either appeal may be
      remanded to decide the issue fresh or by setting aside the
      impugned judgment and decree, a liberty may be granted to file a
      fresh suit on the same ground.


5.    Mr. Nirad Buch, learned advocate vehemently opposed the
      contention advanced by learned counsel Mr. Jani and submitted
      that, once the Family Court has decided the issues on merits, then,
      question does not arise to remand the matter or to give fresh
      opportunity to file a suit on the same ground.


6.    We have carefully examined the impugned judgment and decree.
      Admittedly, the Family Suit was presented within a period of 1
      year. Section 14 of the Hindu Marriage Act clearly provides that,
      no court can entertain any petition for divorce of marriage unless at
      the date of presentation of the petition, one year has elapsed since
      the date of marriage. The Family Court has decided the suit on
      merits. In para-(9-2) of the judgment, the Family Court, has clearly
      opined that, the suit is prematured and is not maintainable as it was
      filed within one year from the date of marriage. The Family Court
      in the judgment, more particularly in para (9-2) has discussed the
      ground of cruelty and desertion and came to conclusion that it was


                                 Page 2 of 3
          C/FA/3246/2024                                                            ORDER DATED: 02/07/2026




            the appellant husband who was not interested to live with the
            respondent wife. In such circumstances, in our opinion, when suit
            is pre-matured or having been filed in violation of Section 14 of
            the Hindu Marriage Act, then the proper recourse available to the
            Family Court, is either return the plaint or dismiss the suit
            reserving the right of the parties to file fresh suit. The Family Court
            could not have discussed the merits of other grounds. In the present
            case, the Family Court failed to assign proper and sound reasons
            on the other grounds also.

 7.         For the reasons recorded, we are of the clear view that, the
            impugned judgment and decree dated 21.08.2024 in Family Suit
            No. 27 of 2024 passed by the Family Court, Kadi, Mehsana is set
            aside. The appellant is permitted to file fresh suit on the available
            grounds as provided under the Hindu Marriage Act. As and when
            the suit is filed, the Family Court shall decide the suit afresh.
            Parties are also permitted to led fresh evidence. The parties shall
            not rely on the evidence led in the present suit (27 of 2024).

 8.         With the aforesaid observations and directions, the First Appeal is
            allowed in the aforesaid terms. No order as to costs.

 ORDER IN CIVIL APPLICATION :
           In view of the order passed in main First Appeal, no order in Civil
 Application and is disposed of accordingly.

                                                                                             (ILESH J. VORA,J)


                                                                                          (R. T. VACHHANI, J)
 P.S. JOSHI

Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judges.
Digitally signed by: PALLAV SUBHASHCHANDRA JOSHI(HC00177), Principal Pvt. Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 02/07/2026 16:21:30

                                                        Page 3 of 3