Sonu vs Shishpal — 54/2025

Case under Hindu Marriage Act Section 13a. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed after Full Trial/Hearing on 16th March 2026.

Family Main Case - FAMILY MAIN

CNR: RJSG240002522025

Case disposed

Filing Number

67/2025

Filing Date

01-07-2025

Registration No

54/2025

Registration Date

10-09-2025

Court

ADJ SADULSAHAR TALUKA

Judge

1-ADJ

Decision Date

16th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismissed after Full Trial/Hearing

Acts & Sections

Hindu Marriage Act Section 13a

Petitioner(s)

Sonu

Adv. Rajesh Kumar Bishnoi

Respondent(s)

Shishpal

Hearing History

Judge: 1-ADJ

16-03-2026

Disposed

13-03-2026

ADR u/s Section 89 CPC/ Counseling

12-03-2026

ADR u/s Section 89 CPC/ Counseling

18-02-2026

ADR u/s Section 89 CPC/ Counseling

13-02-2026

ADR u/s Section 89 CPC/ Counseling

Final Orders / Judgements

16-03-2026
Judgement

Case Summary: Sonu v. Shishpal (54/2025) The court dismissed Sonu's petition for divorce under Section 13A of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, finding insufficient evidence to support her claims of cruelty by her husband Shishpal. Although Sonu alleged dowry demands, verbal abuse, and abandonment by Shishpal after he developed a relationship with another woman, she failed to produce corroborating evidence or witness testimony to substantiate these serious allegations in court. The court held that since a petitioner bears the burden of proving facts placed before the court, and Sonu provided no supporting evidence despite opportunity to do so, her unsubstantiated assertions could not justify granting the divorce. Both parties are directed to bear their own costs, with the decree of dismissal recorded accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Sonu v. Shishpal (54/2025) The court dismissed Sonu's petition for divorce under Section 13A of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, finding insufficient evidence to support her claims of cruelty by her husband Shishpal. Although Sonu alleged dowry demands, verbal abuse, and abandonment by Shishpal after he developed a relationship with another woman, she failed to produce corroborating evidence or witness testimony to substantiate these serious allegations in court. The court held that since a petitioner bears the burden of proving facts placed before the court, and Sonu provided no supporting evidence despite opportunity to do so, her unsubstantiated assertions could not justify granting the divorce. Both parties are directed to bear their own costs, with the decree of dismissal recorded accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

ADJ SADULSAHAR TALUKA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case