Skip to main content

mutual divorce case lawyer

X v. Y., R/ First Appeal No. 1709 of 2025, decided on 23-7-2025

Gujarat High Court: In an appeal against the Family Court order dated 19-4-2025, wherein the appellants’ plea for declaration of dissolution of marriage by ‘Mubaraat’ was dismissed, the Division Bench of A.Y. Kogje* and N.S. Sanjay Gowda, JJ, held that an agreement of ‘Mubaraat’ was not required to be in a written format to be considered a valid procedure for divorce by mutual consent.Thus, the Court remanded the case back to Family Court, holding that the Family Court had jurisdiction under Section 7 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (the Act) to adjudge the suit. Background Appellant 1 and 2 were married with 3 children born out of wedlock. Due to constant conflicts, the appellants could not sustain their married life together and had therefore, decided to mutually dissolve their marriage. They had approached the Family Court for declaration of dissolution of marriage by ‘Mubaraat’ under the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 but the Family Court vide order dated 19-4-2025 had dismissed the suit treating it as not maintainable. The Family Court had opined that the suit was in the nature of dissolution of marriage which fell squarely within the domain of Muslim Personal Law and the Family Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the same. Furthermore, the Family Court had held that a ‘Mubaraat Agreement’ in a written form was sine qua non for dissolving a Muslim marriage by mutual consent. Analysis, Law and Decision The Court in the instant case, referred to various texts and sources of Muslim Law and noted that over 130 verses of Quran support ‘Mubaraat’ as a valid procedure for mutual separation. Thus, the parties are at liberty to agree to mutually dissolve a Muslim marriage when it has come to its end. The Court opined that, based on the several texts analysed by the Court, there was nothing to suggest that a written agreement of ‘Mubaraat’ was necessary for dissolving a marriage or that there was a prevailing practice of maintaining a record register of mutually dissolved Nikkah.
The Court further noted that even though Muslim marriage is generally registered in a register maintained by a local body on the basis of which a Nikahnama is issued, such registration is not mandatory. The Nikahnama so issued is only a declaration of agreement of marriage entered into between parties. The Court held that thus, for dissolution of marriage as well, expression of mutual consent between parties is sufficient and an agreement in a written format is not essential. The Court further held that the logic given by the Family Court with regard to registering of a Muslim marriage under a register to treat it as a written contract was erroneous since such register and Nikahnama only recognises the agreement entered into by the parties to the marriage and does not make a Nikahnama or registration of a Nikah part of an essential process of Nikah. Similarly, a written agreement is not an essential requirement for dissolution of marriage by ‘Mubaraat’. Furthermore, the Court opined that suit before the Family Court was for declaration of dissolution of marriage and not for dissolving the marriage per se. As such, Explanation (b) of Section 7 of the Act, confers jurisdiction upon the Family Court to declare validity of marriage or marital status of a person. Therefore, the Court held that the suit before the Family Court was maintainable as it fell within the confines of Section 7 of the Act. Accordingly, the Court remanded the matter back to the Family Court to be tried on merits. The Court further directed the Family Court to conclude the proceedings within three months from date of receipt of the instant order. 


Advocate Devashish Maharishi | Best divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court Delhi
+91 85957 22509


Advocate Devashish Maharishi | Best divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court Delhi
+91 85957 22509

Advocate Devashish Maharishi | Best divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court Delhi
+91 85957 22509


Best Divorce lawyer

Best divorce lawyer in karkardooma Court

Best divorce lawyer in East delhi

Best divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court

Best divorce lawyer in Delhi

Best divorce case lawyer in Delhi

Best divorce lawyer in new delhi

Best divorce lawyer in Tis Hazari Court central Delhi

Best divorce lawyer in saket Court South Delhi

Best divorce lawyer in dwarka Court delhi


Best divorce lawyer in rohini Court

Best divorce lawyer in North Delhi

Mutual consent divorce lawyer

Best mutual divorce lawyer

Maintenance case lawyer

Domestic violence case lawyer

Contested divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court Delhi

Adultery divorce case lawyer in Delhi India

Transfer petition case lawyer

Best lawyer in delhi

Top lawyer in delhi NCR

Transfer petition case lawyer


Domestic violence case lawyer in karkardooma Court delhi

Maintenance case lawyer

Best lawyer in karkardooma court delhi


Mutual consent divorce lawyer

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Best divorce lawyer in karkardooma Court delhi

Best Divorce lawyer Best divorce lawyer in karkardooma Court Best divorce lawyer in East delhi Best divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court Best divorce lawyer in Delhi Best divorce case lawyer in Delhi Best divorce lawyer in new delhi Best divorce lawyer in Tis Hazari Court central Delhi Best divorce lawyer in saket Court South Delhi Best divorce lawyer in dwarka Court delhi Best divorce lawyer in rohini Court Best divorce lawyer in North Delhi Mutual consent divorce lawyer Best mutual divorce lawyer Maintenance case lawyer Domestic violence case lawyer

When is an Offence Murder Or attempt to Murder in Delayed Death

Supreme Court Clarifies Murder vs. Attempt to Murder in Delayed Death: Key Takeaways from Maniklal Sahu vs. State of Chhattisgarh Criminal Appeal No. 5578 of 2024, Judgment Dated September 12, 2025 In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court has clarified the distinction between murder under Section 302 and attempt to murder under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) , specifically in cases where the death occurs long after the original assault due to medical complications like septicemia. The ruling came from the recent Maniklal Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh case , which sheds new light on how courts should treat delayed deaths caused by the injuries inflicted in an assault. Key Facts: The case involved the conviction of Maniklal Sahu and three co-accused for the murder of Rekhchand Verma. Rekhchand was assaulted by the accused on February 22, 2022, and suffered severe injuries. He survived for about nine months but eventually died on November 8, 2022, due to septicemia and pneum...

Legal Expert for Divorce, Maintenance, and Domestic Violence Cases in Delhi Courts

Legal Expert for Divorce, Maintenance, and Domestic Violence Cases in Delhi Courts Are you facing domestic abuse or navigating a complex matrimonial dispute ? Do you need a professional advocate to handle maintenance cases, alimony , interim maintenance , or custody issues? If so, you need the expertise of an experienced family law attorney who can provide strong representation in family courts across Delhi . Advocate Devashish Maharishi is one of the leading divorce and family law lawyers practicing in Delhi, with a focus on cases related to: Divorce (Mutual and Contested) Domestic Violence Protection Maintenance, Alimony, and Interim Maintenance Child Custody and Custody Disputes Transfer Petitions & NRI Divorce Cases With years of experience in handling matrimonial disputes, Advocate Devashish Maharishi offers legal assistance in various courts in Delhi, including: Karkardooma Court Saket Court Patiala House Court Tis Hazari Court Rohini Court Dwarka Court Whether you'r...