The Delhi High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by a husband challenging a Family Court order that restored his wife’s right to file a written statement in an ongoing divorce case. The Court held that a litigant cannot take advantage of his own failure to comply with court directions.
Background of the Case
According to court records, the couple married in February 2019 and have a minor son who currently lives with the wife. Due to matrimonial disputes, the wife allegedly left the matrimonial home with the child in late 2023. The husband later filed a divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court in Dwarka.
In April 2024, the Family Court directed the husband to pay ₹11,000 towards litigation expenses to the wife within one week. The wife was then granted four weeks to file her written statement. However, the amount was not paid within the prescribed time.
Read also:- Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Man in Minor Girl Kidnapping Case, Says She Left Home Voluntarily
Later, after the wife failed to submit her written statement within the deadline, the husband sought striking off her defence. On September 20, 2024, the Family Court barred her from filing the written statement.
The wife subsequently approached the Family Court seeking revival of her right to file the written statement. She also filed a maintenance application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
On February 5, 2026, the Family Court restored her right, observing that the husband himself had failed to comply with the earlier order directing payment of litigation expenses. This order was challenged before the High Court.
Before the High Court, the husband argued that the wife’s request was delayed by nearly a year and that no application for condonation of delay had been filed. He also claimed that the statutory timeline for filing a written statement had already expired.
Rejecting the argument, the High Court noted that the husband had not paid the litigation expenses within time despite clear directions from the Family Court.
Read also:- Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction In POCSO Case, Reduces 20-Year Jail Term To 14 Years
The bench of Justice Vivek Chaudhary and Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta observed,
“The appellant cannot be permitted, by his conduct, to put the respondent at a disadvantage and thereafter claim benefit of the same.”
The Court relied on Section 23 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which embodies the principle that no party should benefit from its own wrong. The judges said this equitable principle applies not only at the final stage of a case but also throughout the proceedings.
The Court further referred to Supreme Court rulings stating that the time limit for filing written statements is directory and delays can be condoned in appropriate cases.
Holding that the Family Court had exercised its discretion properly, the Delhi High Court found no illegality in the order restoring the wife’s right to file her written statement.
“The appellant, having failed to comply with the Court’s direction, cannot be permitted to contend that the respondent should suffer the consequences of delay,” the bench said while dismissing the appeal.
The Court also clarified that its observations were limited to the present appeal and would not affect the merits of the matrimonial dispute pending before the Family Court.
Case Details:
Case Title: NB vs. SB
Case Number: MAT.APP.(F.C.) 63/2026
Judges: Justice Vivek Chaudhary and Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta
Decision Date: May 5, 2026
