Skip to content


Satish Balkrishna Shekatkar Vs. Subhada Satish Shekatkar - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectFamily
CourtMumbai High Court
Decided On
Case NumberFirst Appeal No. 182 of 1982
Judge
Reported in1984(1)BomCR344
ActsHindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Sections 13B
AppellantSatish Balkrishna Shekatkar
RespondentSubhada Satish Shekatkar
Appellant AdvocateBhimarao N. Naik, Adv.
Respondent AdvocateD.K. Ghaisas, Adv.
DispositionAppeal allowed
Excerpt:
family - divorce - section 13b of hindu marriage act, 1955 - appeal filed claiming decree for divorce - both parties prayed for divorce by mutual consent -custody of child to remain with respondent - relief of divorce by mutual consent granted. - indian evidence act, 1872 section 24: [v.s. sirpurkar & deepak verma,jj] dying declaration - multiple murders by accused - dying declaration not implicating one accused - evidence of eye witnesses however completely fixing his criminal liability ocular evidence found credible held, absence of his name in dying declaration would be of no help to accused. - he further admits that she will be properly looking after the well-being and education of the child......parties are personally present and they are identified by their respective learned counsel. wife shubhada states that she has voluntarily filed this application. so also husband satish states that there is no other go for him but to take divorce by consent, for they are residing separately for the last 21/2 years. both of them further admit that there is one child by name aniket. father satish expressly states that he has no objection if that child remains in the custody of mother shubhada, who is employed in the state bank of india. he further admits that she will be properly looking after the well-being and education of the child. under these circumstances, both of them pray that custody of the child be given to respondent shubhada.2. having heard the parties and their respective.....
Judgment:

B.A. Masodkar, J.

1. This appeal by the original petitioner, who claimed a decree for divorce, is being disposed of by consent of the parties as the original petition was amended with the leave of the Court and both the parties are presently praying for the divorce by mutual consent. Both the parties are personally present and they are identified by their respective learned Counsel. Wife Shubhada states that she has voluntarily filed this application. So also husband Satish states that there is no other go for him but to take divorce by consent, for they are residing separately for the last 21/2 years. Both of them further admit that there is one child by name Aniket. Father Satish expressly states that he has no objection if that child remains in the custody of mother Shubhada, who is employed in the State Bank of India. He further admits that she will be properly looking after the well-being and education of the child. Under these circumstances, both of them pray that custody of the child be given to respondent Shubhada.

2. Having heard the parties and their respective learned Counsel, it appears just and fair to grant the relief of divorce by mutual consent. Accordingly, in this appeal, it is directed that a decree for divorce be drawn under section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The decree to set out that custody of child Aniket to remain with respondent Shubhada. The appeal is thus allowed with no order as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //