JYOTI DAHIYA vs ZUBER ANSARI

Judgment text excerpt

$~100 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 19.03.2025 + MAT.APP.(F.C.) 113/2025 JYOTI DAHIYA .....Appellant Through: Mr. Ashok K. Singh, Ms. Ankita and Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advs. versus ZUBER ANSARI .....Respondent Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL) CM APPL. 16072/2025 (Exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CM APPL. 16073/2025 (Delay of 144 days) 2. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 144 days in filing the appeal is condoned. 3. This application stands disposed of. MAT.APP.(F.C.) 113/2025 & CM APPL. 16074/2025 4. This appeal has been filed by the appellant, challenging the Signature Not Verified Signed By:VIJAYA MAT.APP.(F.C.) 113/2025 Page 1 of 3 LAKSHMI DOBHAL Signing Date:26.03.2025 11:03:02 Order dated 24.08.2024 passed by the Learned Judge Family Court- 01, (NE), Karkardooma Court, Delhi in ML No. 42/2022 titled ‘ Zuber Ansari vs. Shama @ Jyoti’, dismissing the application filed by the appellant under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short, ‘CPC’) seeking rejection of the petition filed by the respondent for restitution of conjugal rights. 5. The respondent had filed the above petition seeking restitution of the conjugal rights with the appellant on the ground that a Nikaah was performed between the parties on 12.03.2019, whereafter, the appellant left the company of the respondent and despite requests had not joined the same. 6. The appellant filed the above application stating that in Muslim Law, there is no provision for the restitution of the conjugal rights. It was further submitted that the marriage was null and void having been conducted by force. 7. The learned Family Court, however, has held that the p