The Allahabad High Court while allowing an appeal observed that a matrimonial dispute remains a dispute between the couple in question who may be finding difficulties in their matrimonial relationship, no third person can seek impleadment in proceedings under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act.
The Division Bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Donadi Ramesh passed this order while hearing an appeal filed by Smt Kriti Goyal.
The appeal has been filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 arising from the order dated 23.04.2024 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Aligarh in Matrimonial Case being proceedings under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act.
While the appellant and her husband had filed a joint motion petition seeking dissolution of their Hindu marriage on mutual consent, their creditors namely Brij Kishore Gupta, Pradeep Bansal and Mukul Bansal (respondent nos 2, 3 and 4) respectively, have joined the proceedings seeking their impleadment as necessary parties.
The Court noted,
The case of the said respondents has been that they had lent some money to the couple in question with respect to which three civil suit proceedings are pending between the couple in question.
Perceiving alteration of their rights if the marriage between the couple in question is dissolved, the said respondents have sought to intervene in the matrimonial discord that too in a joint motion petition filed by the couple in question.
Thus, the respondents are seen to be intermeddling in the matrimonial discord situation of the couple in question. Piquant as it may be, the impleadment sought may never be justified. A matrimonial dispute remains a dispute between the couple in question who may be finding difficulties in their matrimonial relationship. All other persons remain strangers to that dispute, the Court observed.
“Though the threat being perceived by the respondents may not be unfounded – that once the marriage between the couple in question is dissolved, it may have some ramifications on the civil dispute that is pending between the respondent on one hand and the couple in question on the other hand, at the same time we can never imagine or permit a situation where the strangers to a matrimonial discord may ever resist its resolution through dissolution on mutual consent. To that extent materialistic goals of the world at large may remain overshadowed by the primacy to be given to resolve the matrimonial discord,” the Court further observed.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the appeal at this stage itself, with the observation notwithstanding the dissolution of marriage between the couple in question, the respondents would remain entitled to raise their claim with respect to the properties that they may claim against Dev Suman Goyal and Smt Kriti Goyal either jointly or individually, in appropriate proceedings.