KANCHAN DEVI RAJEEV CHARGOTRA vs AMIT SHARMA — CM(M)/85/2026

Case under Article 227-Section 104 Section 1A. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 06th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 06-May-2026

CNR: JKHC020025402026

Filing Number

CM(M)/1902/2026

Filing Date

05-May-2026

Registration No

CM(M)/85/2026

Registration Date

05-May-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rahul Bharti

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rahul Bharti

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

SB PETITIONS U/S 104 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR – CM(M) ( 129 )

Sub-Category

AGAINST AN INTERIM ORDER ( 1 )

Judicial Branch

CIVIL CASES (C)

Decision Date

06-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 08-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Article 227-Section 104 Section 1A

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.KANCHAN DEVI RAJEEV CHARGOTRA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.AMIT SHARMA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-May-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rahul BhartiView PDF

    The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir set aside the lower court's procedural approach in a divorce case, holding that the Principal District Judge, Samba erred by treating the matrimonial petition as routine civil litigation without attempting reconciliation or mediation as mandated under Section 23(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Order 32-A of the CPC. The court remanded the case, directing the trial court to first undertake reconciliation/mediation efforts before proceeding to adjudication on merits, emphasizing that such initiatives must occur at the inception of matrimonial proceedings rather than after pleadings are exchanged. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-May-2026

    For Admission Before Notice

  4. 05-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CM(M)/85/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir set aside the lower court's procedural approach in a divorce case, holding that the Principal District Judge, Samba erred by treating the matrimonial petition as routine civil litigation without attempting reconciliation or mediation as mandated under Section 23(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Order 32-A of the CPC. The court remanded the case, directing the trial court to first undertake reconciliation/mediation efforts before proceeding to adjudication on merits, emphasizing that such initiatives must occur at the inception of matrimonial proceedings rather than after pleadings are exchanged. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case