RAMINDER SINGH vs HARGUN KAUR SAHNI

Judgment text excerpt

$~110 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 07.04.2025 + MAT.APP.(F.C.) 134/2025 RAMINDER SINGH .....Appellant Through: Mr. Mandeep Baisala, Advs. versus HARGUN KAUR SAHNI .....Respondent Through: Nemo CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL) CM APPL. 20449/2025 (Exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. MAT.APP.(F.C.) 134/2025 2. This appeal has been filed by the appellant, challenging the Order dated 10.03.2025 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court- 01, West District, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as, ‘Family Court’) in HMA No. 3525/2022, titled Raminder Singh v. Hargun Kaur Sahni, whereby the application filed by the respondent under Order VII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘CPC’) was allowed and the divorce petition was returned finding that the said Family Court had no territorial jurisdiction to try and entertain the same. 3. In the divorce petition filed by the appellant, he admitted that the marriage between him and the respondent was solemnized on Signature Not Verified MAT.APP.(F.C.) 134/2025 Page 1 of 4 Signed By:VIJAYA LAKSHMI DOBHAL Signing Date:16.04.2025 11:24:03 24.10.2020 according to the “Arya Samaj/Sanatan Rites, Customs and Ceremonies” at Arya Samaj Mandir, Vivah Bandhan Trust, D-178, School Block Nathu Colony, Shahdara, Delhi. The marriage was subsequently registered at the office of the District Magistrate, Shahdara, on 26.10.2020. The appellant claimed that “after the solemnization of the marriage at the Arya Samaj, Shahdara Delhi - 110093, the newly wedded couple, that is, the petitioner and the respondent, stayed at …. Hari Nagar, New Delhi-110058, that is, the matrimonial house of the re