Select a page

Useful Judgements

  • RAJKISHORE MISHRA & ANR. Vs. STATE & ANR.

    Court: ORISSA HIGH COURT
    Parties have agreed for dissolution of their marriage. Continuance of criminal case under Section 498-A, I.P.C. against husband and mother-in-law of wife not in interest of justice.

    0
  • GANGI DEVI Vs. ALAM CHAND

    Court: HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Wife not entitled to maintenance; if living separately without reasonable cause — Petitioner living separately without any reasonable cause — Not entitled to maintenance.

    0
  • SANGEETA S. CHUGH Vs. RAM NARAYAN V. & OTHERS

    Court: KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
    Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Sec. 24 — Transfer petition — Allegations against Presiding Officer — Held that it cannot be expected that Judges should be silent without expressing any opinion — Spinex like attitude not expected from Presiding Officer especially when trying a matrimonial case or litigation between very near relations.

    0
  • MOHD. HOSHAN, A.P. & ANR. Vs. STATE OF A.P.

    Court:Supreme Court of India
    Appellants in Imprisonment for about two Months : Appellant No. 2 is Mother of Appellant No. 1 and Aged 60 Years : Both Appellants on Bail and not Appropriate to Send them to Jail again : Just and Proper to Modify Sentence of Imprisonment for Period Already Undergone — Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 306, 498-A.

    0
  • SHIV INDERSEN MIRCHANDANI & ORS. Vs. NATASHA HARISH ADVANI & ORS.

    Court: BOMBAY HIGH COURT
    Foreign Judgment shall not be recognised if not Pronounced by Court of Competent Jurisdiction : General and Well Established Rule of Private International Law is that Wife’s Domicile Follows Domicile of Husband — Competency of Court to be decided with reference to question of jurisdiction — If Court has no jurisdiction it is not competent Court to pass decree.

    1
  • PHOOL CHANDRA JAIN & ORS. Vs. STATE OF M.P.

    Court: MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Complainant wife lodged report against her husband, accused — Who alleged to demand dowry and maltreat her — During course of arguments, complainant and her husband mutually settled their differences amicably — Decided to live together — Petition for grant of anticipatory bail allowed.

    0
  • MALAYAIAH Vs. G.S. VASANTHA LAKSHMI & ORS.

    Court:KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
    No maintenance if separation by mutual consent. Wife living separately from her husband by consent–– Cannot enforce her right and ask for maintenance.

    0
  • SMT. KAMALSHRI @ PRIYA JAIN Vs. PRAMOD KUMAR

    Court: MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Statements of witnesses prove behaviour of appellant/wife due to her mental illness was so apprehensive/reprehensive that it was torture for respondent-husband to live with her : Mental agony and affliction caused to respondent/husband by hazardous act and conduct of appellant/wife establishes mental disorder of appellant/wife was of such kind and so extensive that it was not possible for respondent/husband to live normal peaceful life with his wife : Trial Court rightly dissolved marriage by decree of divorce on ground mentioned under Section 13(1)(iii) of Act.

    1
  • MIRAPALA VENKATARAMANA Vs. MIRAPALA PEDDIRAJU

    Court: ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Adulterer necessary party and ought to be made second respondent.

    0
  • KISHAN SINGH & ANR. Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

    Court:Supreme Court of India
    Acquittal of Husband in 498A on the ground that the He was not staying with the Wife regularly and used to come only for a few days as he was working in the Army.

    0
  • SONU & ORS. Vs. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

    Court:DELHI HIGH COURT
    Territorial Jurisdiction — Criminal Breach of Trust, Cruelty — Transfer of FIR — Writ of mandamus — No allegation in FIR that part of crime committed in Delhi — Parties never lived in Delhi — Marriage took place in U.P. — Matrimonial home was in Patiala and alleged crime of dowry allegedly committed in Patiala (Punjab) — There is no illegality in registration of FIR in Delhi, but retaining of FIR with PS, Malviya Nagar raises doubt about bona fides of SHO — SHO, PS Malviya Nagar directed to transfer FIR in question to concerned PS at Patiala (Punjab) where offence committed.

    0
  • SONU KUMAR & ORS. Vs. STATE OF DELHI

    Court:DELHI HIGH COURT
    No specific instance of harassment has been alleged by relatives of Wife. Prosecution has not led any evidence to establish alleged harassment of Wife by Husband.

    0
  • VITTHAL HIRAJI JADHAV Vs. HARNABAI VITTHAL JADHAV & ANR.

    Court:BOMBAY HIGH COURT
    Husband and Wife living separately by mutual consent. Wife loses right to claim alimony from such husband.

    0
  • ROHIT SHEKHAR Vs. NARAYAN DUTT TIWARI & ANR.

    Court:DELHI HIGH COURT

    Bench: JUSTICES A.K. Sikri, ACJ. & Rajiv Sahai Endlaw

    ROHIT SHEKHAR Vs. NARAYAN DUTT TIWARI & ANR. On 27 April 2012

    Law Point:
    Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 39 Rules 1, 2, Order 12 Rule 8, Order 11, Order 16, Section 36 — Evidence Act, 1872 — Sections 112, 114 — Constitution of India, 1950 — Art. 21 — Perpetual Injunction —Restraining respondent No. 1 from denying in public or otherwise paternity of appellant and to submit himself for DNA test — Once Supreme Court has held civil Court entitled to issue such a direction, law in other jurisdiction pales into insignificance — Order directing respondent No. 1 to undergo DNA testing was an order in exercise of powers by Court under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of CPC and not in exercise of powers as under Order 12 Rule 8 or Order 11 or Order 16, CPC, for non-compliance whereof adverse inference is permitted to be drawn — A Court of law cannot sit still with folded hands and countenance its injunction being treated with indifference or scant courtesy by party against whom it is directed and who is bound to obey…

    0
  • GANGA SHARAN DHAWAN Vs. STATE OF DELHI

    Court:DELHI HIGH COURT
    Since all the disputes have been resolved between the Husband and the Wife , and the terms and conditions have been implemented, no useful purpose will be served to award substantive sentence to the Husband under Section 498A IPC.

    0
  • SHANKAR CHAKRAVARTY Vs. PUSPITA CHAKRAVARTY

    Court: JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
    Parties living separate from each other. No chance of their living together. Better that both parties be permanently allowed to live separate from each other. Decree of divorce allowed.

    0
  • SMT. SURBHI AGRAWAL Vs. SANJAY AGRAWAL

    Court: MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Cruelty in the Act not envisaged to acts of physical violence and may extend to behaviour causing pain and injury to mind and to render continuance in matrimonial home an ordeal making it impossible for them to live together without mental agony, torture or distress — Acts and conducts amounting to mental cruelty have some times more devastating effect than acts of physical violence.

    1
  • VINEETA DEVI Vs. BABLU THAKUR & ANR.

    Court: JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
    Statutory provision by which “Wife” has been defined cannot be liberalized in terms of Section 125, Cr.PC — Statute sanctions an illegitimate child from father is entitled for maintenance but such sanction of maintenance not provided under law in respect of woman not lawfully married with a person.

    0
  • Chandraprakash Vs. Pushpa Bai Kushwah

    Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
    Bail granted to Husband in connection to a case registered under Section 31 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.

    0
  • BRIJ MOHAN Vs. STATE

    Court:DELHI HIGH COURT
    No allegation of cruelty is borne out against appellant. No grievance about ill-treatment meted out to the deceased much less any demand of dowry. No prior complaint or any contemporaneous document has been placed on record to elucid the demand of dowry and harassment by appellant. Version of witness is full of improvements and embellishment which cannot be relied upon. Appellant is acquitted of charge punishable under Section 498A, IPC for which he has been convicted.

    0
  • Smt. Kanchan Upadhyay Vs. State Of U.P.

    Court:Allahabad High Court
    Wife cannot claim restoration of possession.

    0
  • MANJU RAM KALITA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

    Court:Supreme Court of India
    Section 498A — Cruelty — Determination of — Factor to be considered, discussed — Petty quarrels cannot be termed as cruelty to attract provisions of Section 498A — Causing mental torture to the extent that it becomes unbearable may be termed as cruelty.

    0
  • NINAD Vs. SANJAY

    Court:BOMBAY HIGH COURT
    Divorced Wife has enough means to maintain herself, grant of maintenance only to Son.

    0
  • ANITA DEVI Vs. PRADYUMAN PRASAD YADAV

    Court:PATNA HIGH COURT
    In retaliation to divorce case criminal case filed by Wife Conduct of appellant negates her claim. Husband able to prove grounds of cruelty.

    0
  • Vishnu & Ors vs Jaya

    Court:Supreme Court of India
    If the children are forcibly taken away from their father and handed over to the mother, it will only traumatize them and it will not do any good to anybody. Custody of children to remain with Father.

    0
  • RAJBABU & ANR. Vs. STATE OF M.P.

    Court:Supreme Court of India
    Nothing on record against Mother-in-Law for cruel act towards Wife. No statement of Father of Wife regarding cruelty being committed on his daughter in her in-laws’ house.

    0
  • SANGITABEN RASIKLAL JAISWAL Vs. SANJAY KUMAR RATILAL JAISWAL, MEHSANA

    Court:GUJARAT HIGH COURT
    Merely because the husband is possessing valuable movable and immovable properties it is hardly of any relevance in the matter for grant of temporary maintenance.

    0
  • NEELAM BISHT Vs. NARENDRA SINGH BISHT

    Court:UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
    Merely for the reason that wife is suffering from illness, no justification on part of wife for deserting her husband and live in adultery. Divorce on ground of desertion.

    0
  • SUSMITA MOHANTY Vs. RABINDRA NATH SAHU

    Court: ORISSA HIGH COURT
    Where order silent about date then maintenance shall be payable from date of order.

    0
  • SUDHANSHU MAULI TRIPATHI Vs. MEENA KUMARI & ANR.

    Court:PATNA HIGH COURT
    Act of Wife in neither willing to return to matrimonial home nor allowing peaceful divorce to petitioner, proves beyond any doubt that there is no chance of marriage being retrieved and continuance of such marriage would itself amount to cruelty.

    0
  • C. MEENA Vs. C. SURESH KUMAR

    Court:ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
    The grounds on which a decree for Judicial separation can be passed are the same as that of a decree for divorce. So unless a case for divorce is made out, the question of granting judicial separation does not arise.

    0
  • RINA SARKAR Vs. PARITOSH SARKAR AND ANOTHER

    Court:CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
    Alleged mal treatment/torture not proved by Wife. Maintenance denied.

    2
  • A. SREENIVASA RAO & ORS. Vs. STATE OF A.P.

    Court:ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Marriage is already dissolved. Domestic Violence Act will not apply.

    0
  • Rajinder Kumar vs State (Delhi Admn)

    Court:Delhi High Court
    After having a finding that there is no allegation for demand of dowry, there is no scope for trial.

    0
  • NIRAJ TRIVEDI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

    Court:DELHI HIGH COURT
    FIR to be registered at place of crime.

    1
  • KIRAN BALA ASTHANA AND ANOTHER Vs. BHAIRO PRASAD SRIVASTAVA

    Court:ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
    Wife was suffering from Mental Illness.This material fact concealed hence Annulment.

    0
  • Dimple Jatin Khanna @ Dimple Vs. Anita Advani And Anr

    Court:Bombay High Court
    For DV, Relationship in the nature of marriage is a must. Relatives who did not share household cant be made respondents.

    0
  • G. Ramanathan vs Revathy

    Court:Madras High Court
    Wife cannot seek the same relief from JM court when matter is pending in Civil Court.

    1
  • SAVITRI DEVI Vs. MANOJ KUMAR & ANR.

    Court:DELHI HIGH COURT
    Property neither belongs to Husband nor taken on rent by him nor joint family property of which Husband is a member. Said property cannot be regarded as “shared household” as defined under Section 2(s) of Domestic Violence Act.

    0
  • Anju @ Ajay vs Yogesh Bansal

    Court: Delhi High Court
    Cruelty held proved is denial of conjugal bliss by Wife to Husband for about 2 months. Marriage Annulled.

    0
  • MANJU DUTTA Vs. STATE & ORS.

    Court: Delhi High Court
    Return of charge-sheet on ground of lack of jurisdiction.

    0
  • DILIP KUMAR Vs. FAMILY COURT, GORAKHPUR

    Court: ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
    Confinement can be only for Period of One Month Even if Default of Maintenance is of More than One Month. Warrant for Recovery of Unpaid Maintenance to be Executed Like Warrant of Recovery of Fine.

    0
  • Kumaresan vs Aswathi

    Court:Madras High Court
    Condition required for grant of maintenance pendente lite is the party should not have sufficient independent income for her/his support. Maintenance denied to working wife.

    3
  • MAYA RAM Vs. KAMLA DEVI

    Court: HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Child born during subsistence of marriage or during 280 days after its delivery shall be conclusive proof that it is legitimate child. Unless proved by clear and strong evidence that husband and wife did not and could not have any access at time when child could have been begotten.

    0
  • VARDHI Vs. NARAYAN LAL & ORS.

    Court: RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
    Ex parte decree upon application filed by respondent-husband under Section 9 of Act, was passed against appellant-wife, before she filed application under Section 13 of Act — Appellant did not attend Court even after service of notice — She did not comply with decree and living separately in spite of fact that decree under Section 9 has already been passed by Family Court Judge — Trial Court rightly concluded that respondent husband has not deserted appellant — There is no question to accept application under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act for grant of divorce on ground of desertion — With regard to allegation of cruelty, appellant admitted that before filing divorce petition, FIR under Sections 498-A and 406, IPC filed against respondent and he was acquitted from charges levelled against him — Appellant-wife pleaded that she had no knowledge of acquittal — Family Court committed no error rejecting application filed by appellant for granting divorce under Section 13 of Act in view of decree granted in favour of respondent under Section 9 of Act.

    0
  • Desh Deepak Kapoor Vs. The State (Delhi Administration)

    Court:Delhi High Court
    In order to substantiate a charge under Section 498A IPC, prosecution to prove that there was a demand for dowry, failure whereof renders conviction there-under unsustainable.

    0
  • Gurbinder Singh vs Manjit Kaur

    Court:Delhi High Court
    Wife guilty of contempt of court. Maintenance denied with cost.

    0
  • Ranjit Singh vs Surinder Kaur

    Court:PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
    The Husband was able to prove that the Wife had deserted him without any reason, much less sufficient, he is entitled to a decree of divorce.

    0
  • Sham Sunder vs Kailash Rani

    Court:PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
    Order under Section 127 CrPC for enhancement of maintenance allowance being a judicial order has to be passed only after summoning the opposite party.

    0
  • Sheila Gupta vs State

    Court: Delhi High Court
    Criminal breach of trust – Where family members of Husband are charge-sheeted for committing criminal breach of trust in respect of dowry articles, it does not contemplates entrustment with all technicalities of law of trust.

    0
  • Rakesh Kumar And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another

    Court:PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
    Allegations are general in nature. No specific date about beating to complainant Wife has been mentioned nor nature of injuries suffered by Wife has been disclosed.

    2
  • Vishwanat Vs. Sau. Sarla Vishwanath Agrawal

    Court: Supreme Court of India
    Events subsequent to filing of divorce petition can be taken into consideration.

    0
  • V.P. Shivanna vs Smt. Bhadramma

    Court: Karnataka High Court
    Issue of salary attachment warrant – Validity.

    1
  • Amarawati And Anr. (Smt.) vs State Of U.P.

    Court:Allahabad High Court
    Arrest is not a must whenever an F.I.R. of a cognizable offence is lodged and any application for bail under Section 437, CrPC should ordinarily be decided by the Magistrate the same day, except in rare cases where reasons shall be recorded in writing for adjourning the hearing of the bail application.

    0
  • K.V. PRAKASH BABU Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

    Court:SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
    If the Husband gets involved in extra-marital affair that may not in all circumstances invite conviction under Section 306, IPC but definitely that can be a ground for divorce or other reliefs in matrimonial dispute. Conviction under Section 306 and 498A, IPC set aside.

    0
  • JUSTYN CYRIL Vs. HANNAH VASANTHIE

    Court: MADRAS HIGH COURT
    From the time of the marriage, the Wife was not willing to have intercourse with the husband, hence Annulled.

    0
  • Dr. E. Shanthi vs Dr. H.K. Vasudev

    Court:Karnataka High Court
    Wife was qualified and working before marriage. She is capable of earning, hence maintenance declined.

    5
  • DEEPAK @ GAJANAN RAMRAO KANEGAONKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

    Court:BOMBAY HIGH COURT
    Wife knew that Husband was married person and had children from his first wife. She is not “aggrieved person” within the meaning of Section 2(q) of DV Act. Not entitled to any relief under DV Act.

    0
  • SAMAR GHOSH Vs. JAYA GHOSH

    Court:SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
    Wife’s total indifference and neglect during illness of husband. Parties have no feelings and emotions towards each other, Impossible to preserve or save marriage.

    3
  • SUO MOTU Vs. USHABEN KISHORBHAI MISTRY

    Court:GUJARAT HIGH COURT
    Detailed Discussion on Civil and Criminal Jurisdiction of DV. Application for DV quashing allowed by CrPC 482.

    3
  • Vandana J. Kasliwal vs Jitendra N. Kasliwal

    Court:Bombay High Court
    Wife was suffering from schizophrenia. This material fact concealed hence Annulment.

    1
  • YAMUNABAI ANANTRAO ADHAV Vs. ANANTRAO SHIVRAM ADHAV AND ANOTHER

    Court:SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
    Personal Law to be considered while deciding CrPC 125.

    0
  • KALYAN ROY Vs. PRIYANKA ROY (BANERJEE)

    Court: CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
    Minor daughter happy in the family of her father. Child is looked after by grandmother. Custody of child to remain with petitioner father.

    2
  • GOVERDHAN Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH (NOW CHHATTISGARH)

    Court: CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
    Evidence of mother and aunt of deceased Wife that when deceased came to her parents house she disclosed that appellant was maintaining illicit relations with his sister-in-law and treating deceased with cruelty. Statement covered by Hearsay Rule and does not fall within explanations of Section 32 of Evidence Act. Same cannot be relied upon for finding guilt of accused under Section 498A. No other evidence to connect accused with offence, conviction set aside.

    0
  • H. SUDHA Vs. T.V. RAMESH

    Court:MADRAS HIGH COURT
    Exact date and time of desertion and instances of cruelty not specifically pleaded by Wife in her petition. No ground for grant of divorce to Wife made out.

    0
  • Kolli Babi Sarojini And Others vs Kolli Jayalaxmi And Another

    Court:Andhra High Court
    Benefits of Domestic Violence Act not to protect a woman who by her aduterous life caused mental agony and family disorder to Husband and Children.

    0
  • Kunaldev Singh Rathore @ Kunal Dev Vs. State Of M.P

    Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
    Defence documents May Be Examined At Preliminary Stage, If Needed. Under Section 482 CrPC the court is free to consider material that may be produced on behalf of the accused to arrive at a decision whether the charge as framed could be maintained.

    0
  • Kamini Sondhi vs Kapil Sondhi

    Court:Delhi High Court
    Sexless marriage, Wife made false complaints to husband’s boss, hence Divorce on mental cruelty.

    0
  • Deb Narayan Halder vs Smt. Anushree Halder

    Court:Supreme Court of India
    Wife who leaves matrimonial home without any justification is not entitled to maintenance under Section 125.

    1
  • Preeti Jain vs Kunal Jain &Anr

    Court: Rajasthan High Court
    Section 65B read with Section 122- Electronic record. It is the discretion of the Family Court to receive the evidence, report, statement, documents, information, etc. placed before it on the test whether it does or does not fecilitate an effectice adjudication of the disputes before it.

    0
  • GLORIO FABIANO DIAS Vs. STATE OF GOA & ANR.

    Court:BOMBAY HIGH COURT
    Liability of husband to pay maintenance arises only if wife is not able to maintain herself.

    1
  • Sunil Kumar Yadav And Others Vs. State Of Haryana And Another

    Court:PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
    Dispute between Husband and Wife settled before Mediation and Conciliation Centre and Wife has received the amount as per the terms and conditions of the settlement. FIR quashed.

    0
  • MALATHI RAVI (Dr.) Vs. DR. B.V. RAVI

    Court:SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
    Behaviour of wife established that she deliberately stayed away from marital home and intentionally caused mental agony by putting husband and his family to go through criminal litigation .The decree of divorce granted by the High Court deserves to be affirmed singularly on the ground of mental cruelty.

    2
  • G. PADMINI Vs. G. SIVANANDA BABU

    Court:ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Act of Writing letter to third party amounts to publishing and publication about impotency of husband creating mental agony and anguish to Husband, which is mental cruelty. Decree for divorce passed.

    0
  • Sunil Dutt Sharma And Ors. vs State And Anr.

    Court:Delhi High Court
    At the time of framing of charge the trial court is not required to meticulously judge the truth, veracity and the evidence in detail. At the stage of framing of the charge, the material placed before court is only to be looked to find out whether there are sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused and not whether the material is sufficient for conviction. Husband discharged.

    0
  • Dalip Singh vs State Of U.P. & Ors

    Court:Supreme Court of India
    No Relief if Litigant lies Or suppresses material fact and came with Unclean Hands.

    0
  • RAJESH R. NAIR Vs. MEERA BABU

    Court:KERALA HIGH COURT
    Wife living separately from husband, by mutual consent.Claim for maintenance and interim maintenance filed by Wife hit by Section 125(4). Claims not maintainable.

    0
  • Hamina Kang Vs. District Magistrate (U.T.) Chandigarh

    Court:PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
    Eviction order can be passed against any person who is in unauthorized occupation of the property of the Senior Citizen/Parent. Daughter in Law ordered to evict property of Father in Law.

    0
  • RAJIV GUPTA Vs. KUMARI DIMPLE GUPTA

    Court:HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
    No Proof that Daughter is Illegitimate Child. Evidence of Mother Remained Uncorroborated by Direct Evidence or by Circumstantial Evidence. Impugned Order For Grant of Maintenance Set Aside.

    0
  • K. Srinivas Rao vs D.A. Deepa

    Court:Supreme Court of India
    Staying together under the same roof is no pre-condition of mental cruelty. Spouse can cause mental cruelty by her conduct even while she is not staying under the same roof.

    0
  • Devender Pal Singh and Ors. vs. State of Punjab and Anr.

    Court:PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
    In disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law.

    0
  • KAWALJEET KAUR Vs. PARAMPAL SINGH

    Court:PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
    Wife misused her right and subjected Husband to mental cruelty. She backed out of compromise and after obtaining lump sum amount filed divorce petition. She also filed criminal cases against respondent and his family under Sections 406, 498A, IPC. Wife left no stone unturned to make life of Husband miserable. Trial Court rightly granted decree of divorce in favour of respondent-husband.

    0
  • THULASI BAI Vs. C.V. MANOHARAN AND OTHERS

    Court:KERALA HIGH COURT
    No ground to award maintenance to Wife because of the decision in Second Appeal confirming the decree passed by the lower Appellate Court annulling the marriage.

    0
  • Manpreet Kaur vs State Of Punjab

    Court:Punjab-Haryana High Court
    Neither Wife nor her father stated about cruelty meted out to Wife by her Husband or his relatives in order to coerce her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable. Appeal against acquittal in 498A dismissed.

    0
  • BALAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

    Court:KERALA HIGH COURT
    Bail : Two provisions i.e. Sections 438 and 439, Cr.P.C. do not remotely indicate petition has to be filed before Sessions Court first and then before High Court. Power to grant bail conferred equally on both Courts. It is clearly concurrent. Citizen has opportunity to approach Court of Sessions and then High Court.

    0
  • B.S. JOSHI & ORS. Vs. STATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

    Court:Supreme Court of India
    Cruelty, Criminal Breach of Trust : Quashing of criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint : Inherent powers of Court : High Court in exercise of its inherent powers can quash same : Section 320, Cr.P.C. does not limit or affect powers under Section 482, Cr.P.C. — Object of introducing Chapter XX-A containing Section 498-A, IPC was to prevent torture to woman by her husband or by relatives of her husband — Hyper-technical view would be counter productive and would act against interests of women and against object for which provision added — Every possibility that non-exercise of inherent power to quash proceedings to meet ends of justice would prevent women from settling earlier : That is not object of Chapter XX-A, IPC — Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 498-A, 406 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482.

    0
  • PUNNAKKAL SREEDHARAN Vs. VELLALI PADMINI & ORS.

    Court:KERALA HIGH COURT
    To claim maintenance it is mandatory to establish due performance of marriage as per personal law.

    0
  • Suman vs Gajender

    Court:PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
    False allegations by wife of illicit relationship of Husband were made and she had refused to consummate the marriage with husband. Mental cruelty caused to husband. Wife also abandoned the marital relationship without any reason amounting to desertion.

    0
  • Pooja vs Nidhi @ Sarika

    Court:PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
    Not a single cogent allegation nor any specific role attributed to married sister in law by the Wife. Allegation are vague and general in nature. FIR under section 498A quashed.

    1
  • State of Karnataka By Mahila Police vs Gnanendra And Ors

    Court:Karnataka High Court
    Once the demand of dowry is not there, and there is no evidence to back it, question of Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act coming into operation will not arise. No case under section 498A made out.

    1
  • Banchhanidhi Das Vs. Kamala Devi and Anr.

    Court:ORRISA HIGH COURT
    Wife had been living in adultery. Evidence clearly indicative of illicit relationship of Wife.

    0
  • SHER SINGH Vs. RAJWINDER KAUR

    Court:PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
    Interim maintenance granted to Wife under section 9. Wife had herself withdrawn from society of Husband. Husband justified in applying for revoking order u/Sec. 127(2).

    2
  • T. HARI KUMAR NAIDU Vs. PRAMEELA

    Court:ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Unsound Mind : Schizophrenia : Non-cooperative Attitude of Wife. Medical Examination Could Not be Completed. Trial Court wrongly shifted the burden on Husband. Marriage dissolved between parties.

    1
  • RADHEY SHYAM & ORS. Vs. MEERA DEVI & ANR.

    Court: RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
    Karta of H.U.F. may be under statutory obligation to maintain disqualified member of H.U.F. and his wife and minor children. But summary proceedings contemplated in Section 125, Cr.P.C cannot be invoked against Karta.

    0
  • KAVITA Vs. GOVT. OF NCT & ANR.

    Court: Delhi High Court
    Question of cancellation of bail stands entirely on different footing from application for release on bail. Investigating Officer not carrying out investigation not a ground for cancellation of bail.

    1
  • VINOD KUMAR RAI Vs. MANJU RAI & ANR.

    Court:ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
    Conduct of wife cruel enough to give rise to suspicions of husband as to fidelity of wife.Differences between parties so deep rooted ruling out any possibility of reconciliation. Divorce granted as requested by Husband.

    0
  • ANIL JAIN Vs. SHILPA JAIN

    Court: MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Future salary is not tangible corporeal property available for seizure. Only when salary became payable and takes shape of tangible corporeal property it can be attached for realization of arrear as well as current maintenance.

    0
  • BHAIRON SINGH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

    Court:SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
    For an offence under Section 498A simplicitor, question of death is not and cannot be an issue for consideration. Conviction and sentence passed on Husband set aside.

    0
  • ROMESH SHARMA Vs. PREM KUMAR SHARMA

    Court:PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
    Wife is staying away from matrimonial house without any reasonable cause. She is not at all proved to be willing to resume cohabitation. Petition for divorce of Husband allowed.

    0
  • POONAM KHANNA Vs. V.P. SHARMA & ANR.

    Court:Delhi High Court
    Petitioner wife concealed material fact of her being employed and earning her livelihood. Interim Maintenance set aside.

    0
  • GIAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

    Court:SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
    Impounding of passport of Father in Law who has to return is cruelty. Passport to be returned on execution of bond.

    0
  • Rakesh Kumar Vs. State & Anr.

    Court:Delhi High Court
    No relief can be claimed by the complainant after taking benefit of settlement.

    0
  • NARAYAN JANGLUJI THOOL & ORS. Vs. MALA CHANDAN WANI

    Court:BOMBAY HIGH COURT
    Married woman cannot enter into domestic relationship as contemplated under Section 2(f) of Domestic Violence Act. Even if she establishes long-standing relationship with a man as his concubine or mistress, she would not be entitled for protection under DV Act.

    0
  • State Of Maharashtra Vs. Madhu Bhisham Bhatia

    Court:Bombay High Court
    Wife herself contending that presently she is residing with her Husband and other family members including father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother-in-law and that whatever differences between the parties has now settled. Husband Acquitted.

    0
  • PARMANAND MISHRA Vs. REKHA MISHRA

    Court:PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
    Decree of restitution of conjugal rights in favour of the husband. Interim maintenance should not be endorsed.

    0
  • RITA DEVI Vs. KARAM CHAND BALIA & ANR.

    Court:HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Both appellant wife and her adulterer found tied down by witnesses. Evidence of Wife regarding forcible extraction of some writing without letting its contents known to her preposterous. Dissolving the matrimonial bond between parties by a decree of divorce.

    0
  • BEDO Vs. RAJINDER SINGH

    Court:PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
    Withdrawal of Wife from society of Husband without any reasonable cause. Decree under Section 9, Hindu Marriage Act passed against her. Any of the aggrieved party can apply for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce.

    0
  • PAWAN KUMAR GUPTA Vs. DEVANTI DEVI

    Court: JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
    Family Court directed to pass fresh judgment in accordance with law taking into consideration all materials brought on record by Husband.

    1
  • State Of A.P Vs. M. Madhusudhan Rao

    Court:Supreme Court of India
    No satisfactory explanation by the wife for delay in filing complaint. Husband Acquitted.

    4
  • SWEETY Vs. PRAKASH KAUR & ORS.

    Court:Delhi High Court
    Story put forth by prosecution as narrated by Wife, found no corroboration whereas there is substance in case put up by Defence. Trial Court elaborately dealt with statement of deceased and other witnesses and found no offence under Section 498A or under Section 406, IPC made out.

    0
  • Noorjahan vs State Rep. By D.S.P

    Court:Supreme Court of India
    No evidence to show that the relative of Husband demanded dowry or was present at the alleged time of dowry.

    0
  • Anil Kumar Pradhan Vs. Madhabi Pradhan

    Court:CUTTACK HIGH COURT
    Child had become compatible to surroundings and situations where she has been staying. Dislocation of child from place where she has grown-up would not only impede her schooling, but also cause emotional strain and depression on her. Welfare of child would be best served, if she continuous to stay in custody of her father No fruitful purpose would be served by giving custody of child to mother.

    0
  • Mausami Moitra Ganguli vs Jayant Ganguli

    Court:Supreme Court of India
    Better financial resources of either of the parents or their love for the child maybe one of the considerations but cannot be the sole considering factor for custody of child. Father granted custody of child.

    0
  • A. JAGADISHWARI & ORS. Vs. A. BIKSHAPATHY & ANR.

    Court:ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
    No Maintenance If Wife “Living In Adultery”. It is not a stray act or two of adultery that disentitles wife from claiming maintenance from her husband. But it is course of continuous conduct on her part by which wife can be called leading adulterous life taking away her right to claim maintenance.

    0
  • SUTAPA BANERJEE Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR.

    Court: JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
    Wife is not willing to live with her Husband without any reasonable cause. While Husband is always ready to keep Wife. No maintenance to Wife.

    0
  • ARUN KUMAR AGARWAL Vs. RADHA ARUN & ANR.

    Court:KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
    Impleadment of adulterer as party : Though no relief claimed against adulterers, he is very much proper party. Absence of provision in Hindu Marriage (Karnataka) Rules, 1956 requiring alleged adulterer to be impleaded as co-respondent in proceedings. Recommendation of such provision into Karnataka made.

    0
  • AMRITA DAS Vs. MUKUL DAS

    Court: GAUHATI HIGH COURT
    Husband unable to prove he did not have marital intercourse with Wife during continuance of marriage. Burden of proof for legitimacy of child in on father.

    0
  • Nil Ratan Kundu & Anr vs Abhijit Kundu

    Court:Supreme Court of India
    Welfare of minor which is material and it is on the basis of that court should exercise the power to grant or refuse custody of minor in favour of father, mother or any other guardian.

    0
  • SANJEEV MAJOO Vs. RUCHI MAJOO

    Court:Delhi High Court
    Application should be made to District Court having jurisdiction over place where minor ordinarily resides. The words ‘ordinarily resides’ does not signify mere temporary residence of fortuitous residence.

    0
  • Kiran Tulshiram Ingale Vs. Anupama P. Gaikwad And Ors.

    Court:Bombay High Court
    The criminal proceedings against Husband so also his conviction quashed in view of the mutual understanding, divorce and compromise between Husband and Wife.

    0
  • RAMESHWAR @ PAPPU & ORS. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

    Court: RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
    Settlement and Understanding Between Spouses to Amicably Live Together with Harmony: Permission to Compound Offence Granted.

    0
  • PARTAP Vs. VEENA

    Court: HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Pleadings should be specific, adultery and illegitimacy of child not proved.

    0
  • KANTABEN MAFATLAL Vs. GOVINDBHAI MANUBHAI PATNI & ORS.

    Court:GUJARAT HIGH COURT
    Keeping poor and unemployed husband in jail indefinitely, can never resolve maintenance deadlocks between Husband and Wife. Husband not able to maintain his wife and children because no fault of him. Husband can never be sent to jail to serve imprisonment.

    2
  • AMIT KUMAR DAS Vs. BASANTI GIRI & ANR.

    Court:CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
    Magistrate is bound to justify his decision directing Husband to pay maintenance from date of application, even though no special reasons are required.

    0
  • RASHMI Vs. VIJAY SINGH NEGI & ANR.

    Court:KERALA HIGH COURT
    Allegations leveled by two sons of petitioner against their mother. No son would like to make such allegations against his own mother, particularly who is living with her. Husband successful in proving that his wife was living in adultery.

    0
  • ROHTAS SINGH Vs. SMT. RAMENDRI & ORS.

    Court:SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
    Three Circumstances on Account of which Wife is not Entitled to Claim Maintenance Allowance from her Husband — Explained. All the circumstances contemplated presuppose existence of matrimonial relations. Provision applicable where marriage between parties subsists and not where it has come to end.

    0
  • Singana Naga Nooka Chakrarao vs State Of A.P.

    Court:Andhra High Court
    Woman should be enticed or taken away for purpose of making her have illicit intercourse with another person. Petitioner Acquitted.

    0
  • Radhe Raman Naik And Anr. vs State Of Jharkhand

    Court: Jharkhand High Court
    Alleged occurrence of offence took place outside of territorial jurisdiction. The criminal prosecution/proceedings cannot continue.

    0
  • Rakesh Kumar Paul vs State Of Assam

    Court:Supreme Court of India
    A person who is charged with an offence, which is punishable with imprisonment for a period ranging from 4 to 10 years is entitled to ‘default bail’ or ‘statutory bail’.

    0
  • PATTA DHANALAKSHMI Vs. PATTA RAMACHANDRA RAO

    Court:ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Wife Pregnant from another person, Husband is entitled to divorce.

    0
  • NEETA RAKESH JAIN Vs. RAKESH JEETMAL JAIN

    Court:Supreme Court of India
    Maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings — Although discretion conferred on Court is wide, Section provides guideline in as much as while fixing interim maintenance Court has to give due regard to income of Husband and Wife’s own income.

    0
  • VED PRAKASH YADAV Vs. STATE

    Court:Delhi High Court
    Travesty of justice if two old and aged petitioners viz. father-in-law and mother-in-law made to languish in jail inspite of circumstances on record to suggest their innocence and not connected with offence. Good and sufficient grounds for release of petitioner father-in-law on regular bail and petitioner-mother-in-law on anticipatory bail.

    0
  • ANOOP KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

    Court:PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
    Vexatious and malicious complaint. No indicated offences are made out. FIR registered in order to wreak vengeance .Complainant did not point out any allegation/material much less cogent, involving Husband in alleged crime. Impugned FIR and all consequent proceedings arising therefrom quashed.

    1
  • CHANDRAWATI Vs. KAILASH NATH

    Court: ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
    Husband tolerating Wife inspite of suspicion for more than two years amounts to condonation. No scope to revert back and utilise such bad conduct for termination of marital tie.

    0
  • DURG VIJAI YADAV Vs. STATE OF U.P. & ANR.

    Court: ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
    Grant of Maintenance — From date of filing application. Express orders are necessary and no special reasons are required to be recorded by Court.

    0
  • Smt. Leela Devi vs Suresh Kumar

    Court:Rajasthan High Court
    Wife herself left Husband’s Home. False and wild allegations by Wife that Husband leading immoral life. Divorce granted to Husband on ground of desertion by wife.

    0
  • Gaurav Kumar Singh vs State Of NCT Of Delhi

    Court:Delhi High Court
    Offences alleged against Husband are not of serious nature. Bail granted.

    0
  • LEELABAI Vs. KAILASH CHANDRA

    Court: MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Application for recovery of Maintenance amount to be made within one year from date on which it became due.

    0
  • JYOTHI AMMAL & ANR. Vs. K. ANJAN

    Court: MADRAS HIGH COURT
    Husband had no access to wife during time she could have begotten child and expert’s evidence excludes husband as father of disputed child.

    0
  • Manjit Kaur vs Santokh Singh And Ors.

    Court:Punjab-Haryana High Court
    Adultery Test — Circumstantial Evidence, Direct proof not available in all cases. Insistence — Denial of legitimate protection of martial rights. Circumstantial evidence — Normal test in proof of charge of adultery — Cogent, Consistent and reliable evidence — Sufficient to record finding of adultery — Uncorroborated inconsistent evidence will not prove adultery.

    0
  • Chhandupriya @ Priyanka Vs. Rahul Mohod

    Court:Bombay High Court
    Wife has a lover from prior to marriage and marriage was not consummated. Marriage Annulled.

    0
  • SAPNA RAMESHCHANDRA TRIVEDI Vs. DARSHAN JANAKBHAI JOSHI

    Court: GUJARAT HIGH COURT
    Wife left matrimonial home after cohabitation of only about 100 days. She was not prepared to face day-to-day stress of married life or bear unavoidable wear and tear of marriage. Trial Court has correctly found that wife had left her matrimonial house without any reasonable cause or excuse and refused to rescue cohabitation. Marriage is dead for all practical purposes.

    1
  • Bhausaheb @ Sandu S/O Raghuji Vs. Leelabai W/O Bhausaheb Magar

    Court:Bombay High Court
    No Permanent Alimony in Sec 11, Permanent Alimony may be asked in sec 12.

    0
  • Bhaurao Shankar Lokhande & Anr vs State Of Maharashtra

    Court: Supreme Court of India
    If the marriage is not a valid marriage, it is no marriage in the eye of law.

    0
  • Bhagwan Raoji Dale vs Sushma Alias Nanda Bhagwan Dale

    Court:Bombay High Court
    Deserting wife not entitled to maintenance u.s 125 CrPC. Not entitled after divorce also.

    0
  • Bhagwan Dutt vs Kamla Devi And Anr

    Court:Supreme Court of India
    Separate income of the wife can be taken into account in determining the amount of maintenance payable to her.

    0
  • Bai Bhanbai Mavji vs Kanbi Karshan Devraj

    Court:Gujarat High Court
    Wife not eligible for Maintenance if it falls under HMA 11.

    0
  • B.Prakash Vs. Deepa

    Court:Madras High Court
    DV and 125 can’t be filed on the same set of allegations and cause of action.

    5
  • B.P. Achala Anand Vs. S. Appi Reddy & Anr

    Court:Supreme Court of India
    Right to Residence after Divorce to be decided based on Divorce Terms.

    1
  • Ashok Yeshwant Samant vs Smt. Suparna Ashok Samant

    Court:Bombay High Court
    Recovery under 125(3) are independent of 127, thus Husband cannot be directed to deposit the arrears as condition to proceed with his application of 127.

    1
  • Arvind Kumar Prasad vs Geeta Prasad

    Court:Patna High Court
    Wife filed 498A and made various scandalous allegations, Divorce on cruelty.

    2
  • Arun Atmaram Patil & Ors vs Sandhya Arun Patil

    Court:Bombay High Court
    When one party has acted on the consent terms to it’s disadvantage, the other party having received the benefits cannot be allowed to backtrack.

    1
  • Amit Agarwal And Ors vs Sanjay Aggarwal

    Court:Punjab-Haryana High Court
    DV can’t be filed after Divorce.

    1
  • Alika Khosla vs Thomas Mathew

    Court:Delhi High Court
    Audio recording with Transcript admissible as evidence in divorce proceedings.

    1
  • ADVOCATE RAMESH & ANR. Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

    Court:BOMBAY HIGH COURT
    “Reside” — Meaning of expression — It implies something more than a casual stay and concrete intention to remain at particular place but not merely to pay casual or flying visit according to Sections 27, 27(2) of DV Act.

    1
  • Abdul Rub & Ors. vs Razia Begum

    Court:Delhi High Court
    Under Domestic Violence Act every relative of the husband cannot be made as a respondent. Only those persons can be made respondents, who satisfy the definition of Section 2(q) of the Act.

    0
  • ABBAYOLLA M. SUBBA REDDY Vs. PADMAMMA

    Court:ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Permanent Alimony and Maintenance : Cannot be Granted Under Section 25, Hindu Marriage Act in Proceedings Under Section 18, Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act. Section 25, H.M. Act should not be construed as entitling woman whose marriage is nullity to maintenance under said provision. Where marriage admittedly is nullity, Section 25 will have no application. Maintenance under Section 25 can be granted only in proceedings under Sections 9 to 14 of Hindu Marriage Act.

    0
  • A. JAYACHANDRA Vs. ANEEL KAUR

    Court:Supreme Court of India
    Clear manifestations of wife suspecting husband’s fidelity, character and reputation. Constant nagging on various aspects certainly amounted to causing indelible mental agony and amount to cruelty. Divorce granted.

    0
  • ANKUR TRIPATHI @ TINNU Vs. RADHEY SHYAM PANDEY & ORS.

    Court:ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
    Parents are natural guardians. No other person can be appointed as guardian of minor. Custody of minor can not be denied to parents, merely on ground of not approaching Civil Court under Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act.

    0
  • RAHUL GUPTA & ORS. Vs. SHALINI AGARWAL & ORS.

    Court:KERALA HIGH COURT
    Cause of action for filing criminal complaint and cause of action for quashing complaint. Distinction between the two explained.

    0
  • RAM SHARAN Vs. ANSUIYA BAI

    Court: MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Additional Evidence : Adultery : Proof Essential for Just and Final Decision of Dispute Between Parties : Parties desire to lead additional evidence after amending their petition and reply on all grounds taken for amendment. Permission granted to adduce oral and documentary evidence.

    0
  • DHAREPPA Vs. RENUKA

    Court:KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
    Application for execution of maintenance order made after expiry of period of one year from date of vacation of stay, warrant cannot be issued for recovery of arrears falling beyond one year from date of application. Wife not entitled to recovery of such arrears.

    0
  • KUSUM SHARMA Vs. MAHINDER KUMAR SHARMA

    Court:DELHI HIGH COURT
    Affidavit of assets, income and expenditure should be filed simultaneously by both parties, after completion of pleadings in maintenance application, to avoid any undue advantage to party who files his/her affidavit of assets, income and expenditure later. Simultaneous filing of affidavit after completion of pleadings in maintenance application would also give reasonable time to parties to prepare their affidavits and compile the relevant documents and would avoid delays.

    1
  • A.V.G.V. RAMU Vs. A.S.R. BHARATHI

    Court:SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
    Non-appearance of respondent-Wife — Dissolution of marriage in terms of Agreement/MoU dated 30.12.2014 — Agreement/MoU bears signatures of Husband and Wife. Wife never denied her signature on Agreement/MoU nor its execution and nor its contents — Both parties pursuant to Agreement/MoU actually filed an application under Section 13-B of Act seeking dissolution of their marriage duly signed. Wife never stated before Family Court during cooling period of six months that she wants to wriggle out of application and does not wish to give her consent for mutual divorce — Respondent also did not appear in person before High Court and nor filed any affidavit except to say through her lawyer — Parties have been living separately for last four years due to which their marriage has become irretrievable and there is no point in keeping such marriage alive.

    0
  • PRATEEK GUPTA Vs. SHILPI GUPTA & ORS.

    Court:SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
    Custody of child — Determining factors — Issue of repatriation of a child removed from its native country is founded on predominant imperative of its overall well-being, principle of comity of Courts and doctrines of “intimate contact and closest concern”

    0
  • AMARDEEP SINGH Vs. HARVEEN KAUR

    Court: SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
    Waiver of statutory period of six months for Second motion — In conducting such proceedings Court can also use medium of video conferencing and also permit genuine representation of parties through close relations such as parents or siblings where parties are unable to appear in person for any just and valid reason as may satisfy Court, to advance the interest of Justice.

    0
  • TRIPTI CHAKRABORTY Vs. ANJAN CHAKRABORTY

    Court:CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
    Post held by Husband and monthly salary are important factors to be considered in determination of amount of maintenance.

    0
  • JASMEET KAUR Vs. NAVTEJ SINGH

    Court: DELHI HIGH COURT
    Minor must reside within jurisdiction of said Court.

    0
  • CHANDAN MISHRA Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

    Court:DELHI HIGH COURT
    Principle of “first strike”. Custody of minor_Principle comes into fray provided jurisdiction of Foreign Court is not in doubt.

    0
  • SHAKUNTALABAI Vs. NAND KISHORE JOSHI

    Court:MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Husband having two houses, cannot be sent to jail for execution of maintenance order.

    0
  • PUTULI DAS Vs. DINA NATH TALUKDAR

    Court: GAUHATI HIGH COURT
    Such a person against whom allegation of adultery is made to be impleaded as party.

    0
  • BHUPINDER SINGH Vs. DELHI COMMISSION FOR WOMEN & ORS.

    Court:Delhi High Court
    No power granted to Commission to pass orders and/or directions for maintenance. These powers vested in Courts, both Criminal and Civil — Rights and obligations in respect of maintenance pertaining to Hindus to be determined under Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act and for immediate relief enacted Section 125, Cr.P.C. to provide interim maintenance.

    1
  • VARALA BHARATH KUMAR AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA AND ANOTHER

    Court:SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
    Wife is only citing incidents of unhappiness with her husband, no useful purpose will be served in continuing prosecution against Husband. There is a total absence of allegations for offences punishable under Section 498A and Section 406 of I.P.C. Proceedings initiated against Husband liable to be quashed.

    0
  • ADITI GOEL Vs. ROHIT GOEL & ORS.

    Court:DELHI HIGH COURT
    Father of minor cannot be deprived of opportunity alongwith parents to prove that custody and guardianship of minor with them is better than that with mother.

    0
  • VIVEK BHATIA Vs. ANJU BHATIA

    Court: UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
    Respondent wife suffering from border line personality disorder which had effect on attitude of wife pertaining to using abusive language and entering into physical assaults. Husband has proved cruelty by wife. Divorce rightly granted.

    0
  • RAMESHWAR PRASAD Vs. SUGNA DEVI

    Court:RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
    Filing of false complaint under Section 498A, IPC by Wife is sufficient ground to constitute matrimonial cruelty

    0
  • KG Vs. STATE OF DELHI & ANR.

    Court:DELHI HIGH COURT
    Development of full potential of child requires participation of both the parents — Child, who does not receive love, care and attention of both parents, is bound to suffer from psychological and emotional trauma, particularly if child is small and of tender age. Mother is directed to return to USA with minor child and it should be the obligation of Husband to provide reasonable accommodation sufficient to cater to needs of minor child. Directions issued, once minor child returns to USA with her mother, orders for custody or co-parenting should be obtained by parties from the competent Courts in USA.

    0
  • STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. ASHWANI KUMAR & ORS.

    Court:HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Presumption as to abetment of suicide by married woman is cruelty. It has to be established that wife was subjected to cruelty as ingrained in Section 498A, IPC.

    0
  • PARIMI MEHAR SESHU Vs. PARIMI NAGESWARA SASTRY

    Court:ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Threat to put life to an end, Removing of Mangalsutram from her neck, Beatings to the child, Frequent desertion of Husband amounts to cruelty.

    0
  • JAIPRAKASH DATTATRAY PATADE Vs. USHA JAIPRAKASH PATADE

    Court:BOMBAY HIGH COURT
    Day-to-day behaviour of wife made life of petitioner intolerable and he left his own matrimonial home to stay with his own relatives Husband not given properly cooked food. He was forced to wash his own clothes and two children tutored by Wife to turn against Husband. Irretrievable breakdown of marriage on account of cruelty inflicted by wife on husband. Husband had no conjugal relations with wife. Wife not filed written statement and was absent on all dates except one date. Marriage dissolved by decree of divorce.

    0
  • MRS. NEELU KOHLI Vs. NAVEEN KOHLI

    Court:ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
    Intention to be cruel not essential element : In marital matters, feelings and attitudes of minds are material.

    0
  • SMT. PRATIKSHA Vs. PRAVIN

    Court:MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Courts Hearing Petitions Regarding Conjugal Rights and Matrimonial Obligations Can Issue Injunctions and Preventive Orders and in Case Element of Property under Dispute, Court Can Exercise Power.

    0
  • AMARAVATHY Vs. R.A. PAKKIRINATHAN

    Court:MADRAS HIGH COURT
    Husband suffered mental agony and pain. Entitled to divorce.

    0
  • KAMLESH KUMARI Vs. VINOD KUMAR

    Court:HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
    False case registered against Husband and his family members only to settle personal scores. Attitude of appellant wife in leaving matrimonial home at her sweet will and pleasure and showing disrespectful attitude to husband and family members, without any justifiable cause is cruelty towards Husband. Parties living apart for 6-7 years, which is admitted and proved on record — Divorce granted.

    0
  • MRS. NILIMA KISHORE MHASKE Vs. KISHORE A. MHASKE

    Court: BOMBAY HIGH COURT
    Family Court Right in Concluding that Husband made out Case for Divorce on Ground of Cruelty and he is Entitled to Decree of Divorce.

    1
  • MAHABIR SINGH Vs. NIRMALA DEVI

    Court:PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
    Offensive language — Addressed the husband as “Fauji Gadha or Fauji Tatoo” — Would not be acceptable to any self-respecting husband — Cruelty made out.

    0
  • SHAMA RAO D. Vs. DR. ANUPAMA

    Court:KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
    Spouse, well educated, responsible, well natured in general sense, abusing the other spouse, physically and mentally, humiliating, using filthy language in front of family members, relatives and mistaking for unintentional deeds. This would amount to cruelty.

    1
  • KAMLAKANT JOSHI Vs. SANTOSHBAI PANDYA

    Court:MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Wife guilty of making false, baseless and dirty allegations against her husband concerning his character. Husband bound to suffer mental agony and embarrassment living jointly with his parents and family members : Wife living separately from last more than 12 years. No valid and sufficient reason of defendant of living separately from her husband : Circumstances sufficient to hold Wife guilty of matrimonial offence of mental cruelty. Husband deserves dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce.

    0
  • SUBHASH CHANDRA DAS CHOWDHURY Vs. SANDHYA DAS CHOWDHURY

    Court:CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
    Forceful entry in house of Husband by Wife with help of local people during pendency of divorce proceedings, amounts of cruelty.

    0
  • DINESH NAGDA Vs. SHANTIBAI DINESH NAGDA

    Court: MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
    False prosecution of Husband and his family members. Appellant and his family members including female family members of appellant had to face agony of trial of criminal case for long 7 years. They had to suffer humiliation during this period and ultimately charges levelled against them could not be substantiated.

    0
  • BHAVANA N. SHAH Vs. NITIN CHIMANLAL SHAH

    Court:BOMBAY HIGH COURT
    False, frivolous and unsubstantiated allegations against husband of having illicit relations with his sisters — No contemporaneous evidence produced by wife to corroborate her version — It was clearly an attempt to sully reputation not only of respondent-husband but also of two sisters who were in profession of Medicine and Law respectively — That by itself is a good and germane ground to dissolve marriage between parties and to grant decree of divorce.

    0
  • VANDHANA GUPTA Vs. RAJESH GUPTA

    Court:MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
    Wife behaving cruelly with Husband and his family members and she left matrimonial house and living separately without any just and proper cause. She has deserted respondent for continuous period of not less than two years. Husband entitled to decree of divorce.

    2
  • PRAVEEN MEHTA Vs. INDERJIT MEHTA

    Court:SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
    Husband Deprived of Normal Cohabitation and Suffered Social Embarrassment Due to Behaviour of Wife. Conduct of Wife in Approaching Police Complaining against Her Husband and His Parents and Taking False Plea that She Conceived But there was Miscarriage, Caused Sense of Mental Depression and amounts to Mental Cruelty to Husband.

    0
  • MRS. GAYATRI MISHRA Vs. PRAMOD KUMAR NANDA

    Court:ORISSA HIGH COURT
    Wife Voluntarily Deprived Her Husband of Her Society and Cohabitation for Years, Which Amounts to Mental Cruelty. Husband can definitely be said to be under strain of wilful separation for years and complete denial of conjugal relationship.

    0
  • SHASHI BALA Vs. RAJIV ARORA

    Court:Delhi High Court
    Denial of sexual intercourse after marriage and refusal to perform customary rituals amounts to cruelty.

    0
  • JATINDER SINGH Vs. ROOPLEEN KAUR

    Court:PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
    Cruelty — To be determined on consideration of various factors i.e. social status, background, custom & tradition, etc. The Court should determine that relationship between the parties has deteriorated to such an extent that it is impossible to live together without mental agony — Need not be of such a character as to cause danger to life or health.

    0
  • D. PARTHASARATHY Vs. MRS. VINAYAPRABHA

    Court:KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
    Conduct of Wife in prosecuting Husband while at same time seeking restitution of conjugal rights shows lack of self-control driving Wife to restrain from cohabitation. Wife persisently indulging in vicious allegations, unmindful of their impact. Husband cannot be found at fault with and his conduct cannot fall within expression “his own wrong”.

    0
  • SMT. NIDHI DALELA Vs. DEEPAK DALELA

    Court:RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
    Evidence Produced by Wife not Sufficient to Disprove Charge of Cruelty and Adultery Levelled against Her : She made Unsuccessful Attempt to Establish that her Husband had Illicit Relations and Wanted to Marry Another Lady. Husband Proved Successfully his Apprehension that it will be Harmful for him to Live with Wife because of her Conduct that Caused Disgrace to him.

    0
  • MUKESH KUMAR Vs. CHANCHAL

    Court:DELHI HIGH COURT
    No strait jacket formula of what is cruelty. Single or even isolated acts of grave severity can constitute cruelty. However, on other hand whole body of evidence may not measure upto required standard to constitute cruelty.

    0
  • C.R. CHENTHILKUMAR Vs. K. SUTHA

    Court: MADRAS HIGH COURT
    Meaning of Cruelty — No specific set of facts which could be taken as one which would constitute cruelty — Gravity, intensity and seriousness of acts of parties should necessarily be considered.

    0

©2018 www.shoneekapoor.com· Crafted with