Ahmedabad: A 42-year-old man from Ahmedabad’s Vastral area has knocked on the doors of Gujarat High Court again after his wife allegedly took a U-turn on their divorce despite accepting Rs 27.5 lakh under a settlement agreement. The woman, who had earlier agreed to separate and withdraw criminal cases against her husband, told the family court that she had “changed her mind” as there was still “love and affection” between them.The couple married in July 2016, but the wife left for her parental home in Vadodara in May 2017 and did not return. The husband subsequently sought divorce under Section 13(1) of Hindu Marriage Act on grounds of cruelty and desertion. The family court dismissed his petition in Dec 2022, prompting him to approach HC.During the appeal, the couple explored the possibility of settling their differences and agreed to part ways. In July 2025, HC disposed of the appeal, directing them to approach the family court with a mutual consent divorce petition under Section 13B of the Act.HC also took note of a Memorandum of Understanding signed between the couple. Under the settlement, the husband agreed to pay Rs 27.5 lakh to his wife, while she agreed to withdraw all criminal cases filed against him and consent to the divorce.Accordingly, the couple filed their second divorce petition, this time by mutual consent, in Sep 2025. During her examination-in-chief, the wife admitted that she had received the agreed Rs 27.5 lakh from her husband. The last cheque under the settlement was to be realised in Jan this year.But on Feb 20, when the matter came up before the family court, the wife made an unexpected turnabout. She filed a purshish stating that she no longer wanted a divorce because there was “love and affection” between the couple.The family court accepted her withdrawal on the same day and brought the proceedings to an end, recording: “In view of the aforementioned purshish and after having heard the petitioner No 2 (wife), this petition shall stand disposed of as petitioner No 2 has withdrawn her consent.”The husband has now returned to HC through advocates Panthil Majmudar and Tejas Mehta. They argued that the family court had failed to properly appreciate the wife’s examination-in-chief, particularly her admission that she had received the settlement amount.The lawyers also questioned the wife’s claim that she had retained part of the money and returned the remaining amount to her husband in cash.After a preliminary hearing on Thursday, HC issued notice to the woman and scheduled the matter for further hearing after two months.
