Rishika Goyal vs Kushal Mittal

SACHIN DATTA, J. (ORAL)

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner alleging wilful disobedience/ non-compliance with the directions contained in the order dated 23.02.2026 passed by the learned Family Court, Rohini Courts, Delhi in HMA No. 2647/2024 titled as “Kushal Mittal Vs. Rishika Goyal”.

It is submitted that the matrimonial proceedings, including an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking maintenance, are pending before the learned Family Court. According to the petitioner, the respondent/ husband has deliberately concealed his true income and financial position, despite the disclosure requirements laid down by the Supreme Court in Rajnesh v. Neha, (2021) 2 SCC 324.

Consequently, the petitioner filed an application under Order XI Rule 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) read with Section 151 CPC seeking production of financial document relating to the respondent and its sole proprietorship concern i.e. M/s S.R. Knits.

The Family Court, vide order 23.02.2026 allowed the said application, directing the respondent to produce all the financial documents in his possession.

According to the petitioner, instead of complying with the said order, the respondent filed a reply dated 01.04.2026, expressly stating that he would not produce certain documents since they pertain to his sole proprietorship concern. The petitioner alleges that the same amounts to wilful disobedience of the directions contained in the order dated 23.02.2026.

Since the concerned Family Court is actively seized of the matter and the process of adducing the evidence is underway, it shall be open to the petitioner to agitate the aspect of alleged wilful disobedience/ non-compliance on the part of the respondent with respect to any orders passed by the Family Court.

Needless to say, if the Family Court finds that the respondent has not been forthcoming with furnishing the requisite documents of income which are in his power and possession, necessary directions shall be issued by the Family court and it shall also be open to the Family Court to draw adverse inference.

The petitioner shall be at liberty to agitate this aspect before the Family Court.

In the circumstances, at this stage, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present petition, while expressly granting liberty to the petitioner to highlight the aforesaid aspect in the proceedings pending before the concerned Family Court. Appropriate orders thereon shall necessarily be passed by the Family Court.

The present petition stands disposed of in the above terms. Pending application also stands disposed of.