Dr. Anupriya Jain vs Dr. Sudhir Kumar Jain

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:32632
1 FA-1957-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR NIRANKARI
nd
ON THE 22 OF APRIL, 2026
FIRST APPEAL No. 1957 of 2024
DR. ANUPRIYA JAIN
Versus
DR. SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN
Appearance:
Shri Amit Kumar Sharma - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Vinod Kumar Dubey - Advocate for the respondent.
JUDGMENT
Per: Justice Ajay Kumar Nirankari
The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant/wife against the
judgment dated 18.08.2023 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Satna
in RCSHM No.437/2021 whereby the application of respondent/husband
under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act was allowed and decree of
Restitution of Conjugal Rights was granted ex parte.
2. Brief facts necessary for adjudication of the case are that the
respondent/husband filed an application under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage
Act, 1955, for Restitution of Conjugal Rights, before the learned Principal
Judge, Family Court, Satna with the allegation that the marriage between
appellant/wife and the respondent/husband was solemnized on 24.05.2013 at
Jhansi as per hindu rituals and traditions. Out of their wedlock, a daughter
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SUSHMA
KUSHWAHA
Signing time: 29-04-2026
14:40:29

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:32632
2 FA-1957-2024
Anshi Jain was born on 25.12.2015. It is further alleged that the respondent

encouraged the appellant to pursue the degree of a D. Pharma course so she
may open a medical store and in that regard, in her education, he spent near
about Rs.1,20,000/-. On 23.11.2020, the appellant/wife left the matrimonial
home and used to reside at Jhansi. The respondent/husband made several
efforts and requested his wife to live with him and discharged duty of wife
but the appellant/wife refused the proposal and willing to live with her
mother. The said application was registered as RCSHM No.437/2021.
3. Learned Family Court issued notice to the appellant/wife, and she
duly appeared before the family Court. The appellant/wife by filing a
Miscellaneous Civil Case No.229/2022 under Section 24 of C.P.C. for
transferring the proceeding of Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act from Family
Court, Satna to Family Court, Datia on the ground that she is residing at
Jhansi and Datia is nearby place to Jhansi, it would be more convenient for
her to attend the proceedings on the date fixed by the trial Court. The said
miscellaneous petition was disposed of vide order dated 30.08.2022 with a
direction to the Family Court, Satna to permit the appellant/wife to mark her
presence virtually, file the documents by way of electronic means and also
examination and cross-examination by way of virtual mode. The copy of said
order was sent to Family Court, Satna for necessary compliance.
4.The learned Family Court, Satna has taken the said order on record.
At that time, counsel for the appellant/wife was present before the Family
Court and matter was continued for initiation of mediation proceedings.
After sometime, the counsel for the appellant/wife has not chosen to appear
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SUSHMA
KUSHWAHA
Signing time: 29-04-2026
14:40:29

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:32632
3 FA-1957-2024
before the Family Court, Satna. Resultantly, the Family Court, Satna vide

order dated 13.04.2023 proceeded ex parte against appellant/wife and posted
the case for recording the evidence of respondent/husband.
5. The learned Family Court, after appreciating the material available
on record, vide judgment dated 18.08.2023 allowed the application filed by
respondent/husband and, while granting a decree of restitution of conjugal
rights, directing the appellant/wife to live with the respondent/husband and
restore the matrimonial life.
6. The appellant/wife, after getting the information that the decree of
restitution of conjugal rights was passed against her, she filed an application
before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Satna under Order 9 Rule 13 of
CPC for setting-aside the said ex part decree. The said application was
unregistered and its C.A.No.1535/2024 and the same was dismissed vide
order dated 29.08.2024 by holding that against an ex parte decree, the
appellant/wife may prefer an appeal under the provisions of Hindu Marriage
Act and Family Courts, Act, and therefore, the application for setting aside
t h e ex parte decree is not tenable in the eyes of law. Thereafter, the
appellant/wife filed the instant appeal.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant/wife has advanced the arguments
that once this Court, while deciding the MCC filed by her had directed the
Family Court to permit her to appear through virtual mode and file the
documents by way of electronic means as well as examine herself and
witnesses in her support which was duly cross-examined virtually. It is
further submitted that the Family Court, Satna without understanding the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SUSHMA
KUSHWAHA
Signing time: 29-04-2026
14:40:29

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:32632
4 FA-1957-2024
said order has not given any information to the appellant/wife for virtual

appearance or filing documents by way of electronic means. It is also
submitted that subsequently, when appellant's counsel was not appeared and
pleaded no instructions, the Family Court proceeded ex parte against her
without giving any information to her. It is also submitted that the impugned
judgment suffers from a serious violation of principles of natural justice and
is not in non-compliance with the directions passed by a Co-ordinate Bench
of this Court in MCC No.229/2022. Thus, prays for allowing the appeal and
the case be remitted back to the Family Court, Satna for fresh consideration
after affording ample opportunities of hearing to the appellant/wife.
8. Learned counsel for the respondent/husband submits that the
learned Family Court has not committed any error in passing the ex parte
decree against appellant/wife because she failed to appear before the Family
Court. It is further submitted that the order passed in MCC No.229/2022 was
duly taken into consideration by the Family Court, Satna, and the counsel for
appellant had sought time on several occasions, for the purpose of mediation
and ultimately, pleaded no instructions. It is also submitted that the Family
Court has no any other option to proceed ex parte against the appellant.
Hence, prays for dismissal of the appeal and affirmation of the impugned
judgment dated 18.08.2023.
9. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record.
10. It is not in dispute that, in the proceeding under Section 9 of Hindu
Marriage Act, the appellant/wife marked her presence through her counsel.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SUSHMA
KUSHWAHA
Signing time: 29-04-2026
14:40:29

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:32632
5 FA-1957-2024
During the pendency of said proceedings, she filed an application under

Section 24 of CPC before a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, for transferring
of the said case from Family Court, Satna to Family Court, Datia on the
ground that Datia is nearby to Jhansi, and that it would be more convenient
for her to regularly appear and take part in the proceedings under Section 9
of Hindu Marriage Act.
11. By disposing of said application Co-ordinate Bench of this Court
vide order dated 30.08.2022 was allowed the said application of
appellant/wife, whereby the appellant/wife was permitted to take part in the
proceedings of Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act by virtual mode. She was
also permitted to produce documents by way of electronic means as well as
examine herself or her witnesses in support of her case through virtual mode.
The said order was placed on record before the Family Court, Satna by the
counsel for the appellant/wife. Thereafter, the matter was going on for
mediation proceedings. Subsequently, counsel for the appellant pleaded no
instructions and the trial Court without informing the appellant/wife,
proceeded ex parte against her. Resultantly, a decree of restitution of
conjugal rights was passed ex parte. No opportunity of being heard was
given to the appellant/wife to produce evidence or file document in support
of her case.
12. The impugned judgment suffers from a serious violation of
principles of natural justice as well as directions issued by this Court in MCC
No.229/2022. The learned trial Court has committed an error in passing the
ex parte decree of restitution of conjugal rights, which is not sustainable in
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SUSHMA
KUSHWAHA
Signing time: 29-04-2026
14:40:29

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:32632
6 FA-1957-2024
the eyes of law. Thus, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed. The

impugned judgment dated 18.08.2023 passed by Principle Judge, Family
Court, Satna in RCSHM No.437/2021 is hereby set-aside.
13. Accordingly, the present appeal is allowed and disposed of.
14. The case is remitted back to the learned Principle Judge, Family
Court, Satna for fresh decision on the application filed under Section 9 of
Hindu Marriage Act, after affording ample opportunity of hearing to the
appellant/wife and in compliance of order dated 30.08.2022 passed in MCC
No.229/2022.
15. Both the parties are directed to mark their presence before the
rd
concerned trial Court, either physically or through virtual mode, on 23 of
June, 2026 and they also shall ensure their presence, either physically or
virtually, on all subsequent dates as may be fixed by the trial Court.
16. Let a copy of this order be kept in the record of the trial Court.
17. Record of the trial Court be sent back immediately to the
concerned Court for necessary compliance.
(VIVEK KUMAR SINGH)
(AJAY KUMAR NIRANKARI)
JUDGE
JUDGE
NP

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SUSHMA
KUSHWAHA
Signing time: 29-04-2026
14:40:29