SMT. SUSHMA vs SH. RATTAN DEEP & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 06.11.2025 Judgment pronounced on: 28.11.2025 + MAT.APP. (F.C.) 281/2024 & CM APPL. 48706/2024 SMT. SUSHMA .....Appellant Through: Mr. SC Singhal, Mr. Parth Mahajan, Ms. Garvita Bansal and Mr. Ritvik Madan, Advocates. versus SH. RATTAN DEEP & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Mrinal Singh and Ms. Priya Rani Jha, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR JUDGMENT ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. 1. Through the present Appeal, the Appellant assails the correctness of a judgment and decree dated 07.06.2024 [hereinafter referred to as ‘Impugned Judgment’] passed by the Family Court while granting declaration to the effect that her alleged marriage with the Respondent No.1 was void as it was solemnized in contravention of Section 11 read with Section 5(1) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 [hereinafter referred to as ‘HMA’]. Signature Not Verified Signed By:JAI NARAYAN Signing Date:28.11.2025 MAT.APP.(F.C.) 281/2024 Page 1 of 12 15:59:13 2. The following two questions require adjudication in the present Appeal: i. Whether the Appellant has successfully proved that ‘custom’ constitutes sufficient ground to take Panchayati Divorce among the ‘Jat’ community, thereby dissolving the marriage? and ii. If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, whether there was Panchyati Divorce amongst the Appellant and the Respondent No.1. 3. In order to comprehend the issues involved in the present case, the relevant facts in brief are required to be noticed. 4. The Appellant was previously married to Sh. Sanjay, whereas the Respondent No.1 was also previously married to some else. The Appellant claims that her marriage with Sh. Sanjay was dissolved by a customary divorc