Bombay HC Dismisses Anita Advani’s Plea Against Dimple Kapadia And Family, Rejects Live-In Marriage Claim

Mumbai, April 1: The Bombay High Court on Wednesday dismissed the appeal filed by Anita Advani challenging a 2017 order of the Dindoshi Civil Court, which had rejected her suit seeking a declaration that her live-in relationship with late actor Rajesh Khanna was “in the nature of a marriage”. The court observed that the claim was legally untenable.

Court ruling

Dismissing the appeal, Justice Sharmila Deshmukh observed, “There is no merit in the First Appeal. Resultantly, the Appeal stands dismissed.”

Background of dispute

Advani has been engaged in multiple legal disputes with Khanna’s wife Dimple Kapadia, their daughter Twinkle Khanna, and son-in-law Akshay Kumar, for nearly 14 years.

Her primary claim has been that her relationship with Khanna was akin to a marriage, entitling her to legal recognition as his widow. She had also earlier initiated domestic violence proceedings against the family.

Arguments by petitioner

Her counsel argued that since 1984, Khanna and Kapadia had been living separately, while Advani and the actor shared a household for several years and “projected to society” a relationship in the nature of marriage.

It was further contended that they celebrated festivals together and that she had financially contributed to the renovation of their residence, asserting that the relationship was “monogamous in character”.

Respondents’ stand

Opposing the plea, the respondents contended that Khanna’s marriage with Kapadia was subsisting, which legally barred any declaration of a marital relationship with Advani. They relied on provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, arguing that no such relief could be granted when a valid marriage already existed.

Court observations

The court noted that the “substantive relief sought is of being declared as widow of the deceased”, which flowed from the claim of a relationship in the nature of marriage. It held that even if the reliefs were treated as distinct, the claim was barred in law due to the subsistence of Khanna’s marriage.

Relying on a Supreme Court ruling relating to recognising live-in relationship as marriage, the court said that one essential condition for recognising such a relationship is that both parties must be otherwise eligible to marry. This requirement was “clearly not satisfied” in the present case.

The bench upheld the trial court’s order rejecting Advani’s plaint, observing that allowing the suit to proceed would be futile.

Also Watch:

Earlier proceedings

Earlier, on April 9, 2015, another bench of the high court had set aside the domestic violence proceedings, holding that Advani failed to establish that her relationship with Rajesh Khanna qualified as a relationship “in the nature of marriage”. As a result, she was not entitled to relief under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

Advani had claimed that she was evicted from Rajesh Khanna’s bungalow, “Aashirwad” in Bandra (West), where she said she had lived with him until 2012 as his “wife” and cared for him throughout his life.

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/