MAMTA DAS vs PUNEET DAS

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 27.08.2025 Judgment delivered on:22.09.2025 + MAT.APP.(F.C.) 160/2022 & CM APPL.43569/2022 (Stay) MAMTA DAS .....Appellant Through: Mr. Zishan Alam Siddiqui, Mr. Akash & Ms. Amisha Upadhyay, Advs. versus PUNEET DAS .....Respondent Through: Mr. Francis Paul, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR JUDGEMENT HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR J. 1. The present appeal has been preferred under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, read with Section 55 of the Divorce Act, 18691, by the Appellant–Wife, assailing the Judgment and Decree dated 31.05.20222 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Tis Hazari Courts (Central), Delhi3, in IDA No. 13/2017. 2. By the Impugned Judgment, the learned Family Court allowed the divorce petition filed by the Respondent–Husband and dissolved the marriage of the parties under Section 10(1)(ix) of the Divorce Act on the ground of desertion, while simultaneously dismissing the 1 Divorce Act 2 Impugned Judgment 3 Family Court Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:HARVINDER KAUR MAT.APP.(F.C.) 160/2022 Page 1 of 36 BHATIA Signing Date:23.09.2025 15:14:24 Counter-Claim bearing No. 01/20224, instituted by the Appellant seeking restitution of conjugal rights. BRIEF FACTS: 3. The parties were married on 26.12.2007 at Free Church, Sansad Marg, New Delhi, in accordance with Christian rites and ceremonies. The marriage was consummated, but no children were born out of wedlock. 4. After marriage, the Appellant-Wife resided in her matrimonial home with the Respondent-Husband at Christian Colony, Karol Bagh, New Delhi, along with the Respondent’s family members. 5. According to the Appellant, soon after the marriag