Page 1

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOS.3884-3886 OF 2013 [Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos.  

33744-33746 of 2012]

ARVIND KUMAR SHARMA ...APPELLANT

VERSUS

VINEETA SHARMA & ANR. ...RESPONDENTS

ORDER  

Leave granted.

The  original  prayer  made  by  the  respondent  

No.1  before  the  Principal  Judge,  Family  Court,  

Dehradun was that the proceedings in Original Suit  

No. 74 of 2009 and Original Suit No.263 of 2009  

should be consolidated and tried together.  This  

prayer  was  rejected  by  the  Family  Court  by  its  

judgment  and  order  dated  27th January,  2012.  

Consequently, respondent No.1 filed appeal before  

the High Court. The High Court noticed the fact  

that the appellant - husband has filed two suits.  

In one suit, he is seeking divorce from the wife.  

In  the  other  suit,  he  is  seeking  permanent  

injunction  as  well  as  temporary  injunction,  

restraining the wife from entering the matrimonial  

home of the couple.  It is also noticed by the High  

Court that in the second suit,  ex parte ad interim  

...2/-

Page 2

:2:

order of injunction had been granted in favour of  

the husband.  The aforesaid suit is still pending.  

Instead of deciding the issue on merits, the High  

Court admitted the appeal and stayed the operation  

of the ex parte ad interim order of injunction as  

well as hearing of both the suits until the appeal  

is heard and decided.   

In our opinion, the aforesaid order cannot be  

sustained.  The High Court has granted a relief  

which was not even prayed for by the respondent,  

who was the appellant before the High Court.  At  

best, the High Court could have directed that both  

the  suits  filed  by  the  husband  shall  be  

consolidated and tried together.   

Mr.  Dhruv  Mehta,  learned  Senior  Advocate  

appearing  for  the  appellant,  submits  that  the  

relations  between  husband  and  wife  have  

deteriorated to such an extent that it would not be  

possible for the appellant to spend any time with  

the respondent – wife.  Therefore, it would not be  

appropriate to order that wife be permitted entry  

into the matrimonial home.   

...3/-

Page 3

:3:

We are of the considered opinion that it would  

not be appropriate for the High Court or for this  

Court to make any observations on the merits of the  

controversy  involved  between  the  parties  as  the  

same shall have to be decided by the appropriate  

Court  where  the  proceedings  are  pending.   We,  

therefore, set aside the order passed by the High  

Court.  We allow the appeal filed by the respondent  

before the High Court.  Both the suits filed by the  

husband  are  consolidated  and  shall  be  tried  

together as prayed for by the respondent wife.  We  

also direct the Court which is designated to decide  

the aforesaid two matters to decide the same as  

expeditiously as possible.  

The  appeals  are  disposed  of  in  the  above  

terms.  No costs.   

....................,J. (SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR)

....................,J. (PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE)

NEW DELHI APRIL 15, 2013