Second marriage during pendency of appeal contravenes appellant's rights under Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
In a significant ruling, the Gujarat High Court has granted a stay on the execution, operation, and implementation of a divorce decree, thereby protecting the appellant’s right to challenge the decree. The judgment addresses the issue of contracting a second marriage during the pendency of an appeal, as governed by Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The Division Bench comprising Justices Ilesh J. Vora and R.T. Vachhani presided over the case, Rajashreeben W/o Bhupendrakumar Patel v. Bhupendrakumar Ambalal Patel, delivering the order on July 6, 2026.
The petitioner, Rajashreeben, sought a stay on the judgment passed by the Family Court in Ahmedabad, which dissolved her marriage with Bhupendrakumar Ambalal Patel. The Family Court had ruled in favor of the respondent, Bhupendrakumar, granting him the decree of divorce and directing him to pay permanent alimony and medical expenses for their son. However, the petitioner contested the decree, emphasizing her statutory right to appeal, which was compromised by the respondent's actions.
The crux of the dispute revolved around Bhupendrakumar contracting a second marriage during the appeal's pendency. The court highlighted the fundamental object of Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which is to protect the appellant from the frustration of their appeal due to a second marriage. The court noted that the immediate action of the respondent to marry again deprived the appellant of her legitimate rights and the ability to challenge the dissolution decree.
The judges examined precedents and legal principles, including the Supreme Court judgments in Anurag Mittal v. Shaily Misra Mittal and Lila Gupta v. Lakshmi Narayan, to interpret Section 15's provision. They concluded that the respondent should have ensured whether an appeal had been filed before contracting another marriage. By failing to do so, Bhupendrakumar's actions were criticized for potentially rendering the appeal infructuous.
The court's decision emphasizes the balance of convenience, which tilts heavily in favor of the appellant. It acknowledged the potential irreparable loss to Rajashreeben if interim relief was not granted, affecting her legal claims and status as a wife.
The judgment not only stays the divorce decree but also underscores the significance of protecting the appellant's rights during the appeal process. The court clarified that the observations made in granting the stay are strictly prima facie and will not influence the final adjudication of the case.
Bottom line:-
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Section 15 Second marriage during pendency of appeal - Contracting second marriage immediately after decree of divorce without ensuring whether appeal has been preferred violates the right of the appellant - Stay granted on execution of divorce decree to protect the appellant's legitimate rights.
Statutory provision(s): Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Section 15
