Instruction
stringlengths 30
171
| Response
stringlengths 16
2.91k
|
|---|---|
What does 'Union Of India Represented By General vs P. Kunhabdulla on 31 August, 1984' say about Repression?
|
1The next ground urged on behalf of the appellants is that the learned single Judge had gone wrong in holding that the charge against the respondent has not been proved. As noticed, the charge against the respondent was under Rules 3(1)(i), 3(1)(iii) and 19of the Railway Services (Conduct) Rules, 196The allegation was that he had entered into correspondence with the press without obtaining the sanction of the authority, and it is unbecoming of a railway servant to have thus published the letter containing objectionable matters criticising the top administration. The learned single Judge noticed that the opinion expressed by the respondent in Ext. P 5 is not directed against any particular officer or authority under whom the respondent had direct employment or relationship or that it was not intended to adversely affect the image of the Railway administration. In the opinion of the learned Judge, the letter Ext. P 5, read and understood as a whole, is aimed at focussing the attention of the railway administration on the need for providing safety measures to prevent recurrence of accidents and the adverse effect of what he thought to be
|
What does 'K. Omprakash vs K. Nalini on 15 July, 1985' say about divorce?
|
of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for dissolving his marriage with his respondent-wife. The petitioning husband is the respondent's maternal uncle. This appears to be a case of familiarity breeding contempt rendering attraction of novelty absent. The parties are Hindus and their marriage took place on 19th Feb., 197But ever thereafter, they do not appear to have lived for long happily together. The husband alleged in his petition filed for
that his wife was in love with one S even prior to her marriage with him and that she was living on terms of illicit intimacy with the said S both before and after her marriage. The petitioner alleged that the wife admitted her illicit relationship with S to him. The husband alleged that he was satisfied that the respondent-wife was trying to snap her relations with him somehow. The respondent had been living away from her husband and with her parents from Jan. 1980, without ever visiting the petitioner except once in the month of July 1980 for just five minutes when the petitioner lost his father. The husband alleged that since January 1980 the parties were living apart and that there was no possibility of reconciliation between them and that the efforts made by the elders for bringing reconciliation between them had failed. The husband also alleged that the petitioner and the respondent agreed for having a
|
What does 'Chitra Lekha vs Ranjit Rai on 30 July, 1976' say about Alimony?
|
The material facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. The parties had been married on 28th June, 197The respondent husband filed a petition for judicial separation on the ground of cruelty under S. 10(1)(b) of the Act. This petition was dismissed with costs in 197During the pendency of the petition the appellant, soon after filing the written statement, made an application on 10th August, 1971 under S. 24 of the Act for grant of ad interim maintenance and litigation expenses. The respondent contested the application on the ground that the court had no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the petition and unless this was decided interim alimony could not be granted. The objection was repelled by the trial court and a revision against the same was dismissed with costs. The respondent, instead of pursuing the petition. Absented himself from the court and his petition was, as mentioned above dismissed with costs.
An authority of the High Court of Myosre, N. Subramanyam. v. Mrs. M. G. Saraswathi, Air 1964 Mys 38, was cited before the learned Judge, who has distinguished the same. Mr. Sethi has challenged the order of the court in this appeal. Notice of the appeal was issued to the respondent, who has not appeared and he has been proceeded against ex party.
|
What does 'Kamalakshi vs Ramasami Chetti on 16 December, 1895' say about Repression,?
|
"The reason why no proceeding can be taken by an infant without the assistance of a next friend is, as stated in Daniell's Chancery Practice, 6th Edition, p. 105, 'on account of an infant's supposed want of discretion, and his inability to bind himself and make himself liable for costs.' And it would seem that the rule was intended for the protection and benefit of defendants, for it has been held that when a defendant waives this benefit and protection, the suit may proceed without a next friend." In ex parte Brocklebank L.R. 6 Ch. D. 358 cited by the learned Judge in support of his opinion, all the Judges proceeded upon the view that an infant to whom a debt was due had a right to enforce the payment of it by means of a debtor's summons and proceedings in bankruptcy based thereon, and that the infant having sued out the writ in the action in his own name without a next friend, was an irregularity which was waived by the conduct of the defendant. There is authority, therefore, for holding that the contention of the defendants (respondents) that the proceedings in the present case were altogether void cannot be supported. It was no doubt open to the defendants to apply under Section 4421 Civil Procedure Code,, to have the plaint taken off the file, as it appeared on the face of the plaint itself that the plaintiff was a minor at the date of its presentation. They not only omitted to do so, but throughout the trial raised no question on the point. And when the District Munsif passed a decree against them, they preferred an appeal against it to the District Court making the plaintiff respondent, without getting a guardian ad litem appointed as if she were not a minor, even though ' at the time the appeal was preferred she was still under the age of 1It is now too late for the defendants to object to the irregularities they complain of.
|
What does 'Channing Arnold vs The Emperor on 7 April, 1914' say about Repression,?
|
, was not unlikely to lead to confusion; but it is at least satisfactory to find that the learned Judge in charging the jury made no mistake in stating what the true issue was, It is admitted by the appellant's counsel that this is so. " What you will have to consider," said the learned Judge to the jury, is " whether the imputations in these articles were published in good faith, after due care and attention had been exercised on the part of the writer of them. What is ' due care and attention ' must depend on the circumstances of each particular case." It is also fair to the learned Judge to say that, while he felt constrained-a course which, in view of the conduct of the defence, is not to be wondered at-to go with some fulness into a narrative of fact, he concluded his charge to the jury by bringing their minds directly back to the exact issue which they had to try. He did so in this language : u It is now for you to consider these matters, and to decide whether the accused has satisfied you that he used the reasonable care that he ought to have used. If you are satisfied that he did, and that he did not overstep the bounds of law as I have explained the law to you, then you must acquit him, but if he has not satisfied you that he has exercised such due care and attention before he committed himself to paper in this way, then it is your bounden duty to convict him.
|
What does 'Shafi Ullah vs Emperor on 19 February, 1934' say about Bigamy?
|
of the Indian Penal Code, i.e., for abetting a bigamy. Mt. Majidan, when she was a minor, was married to one Tufail Ahmad, She did not live with her husband and after attaining the age of puberty she married again one Himayat Ullah. Himayat Ullah, Mt. Majidan and Shafi Ullah, a relation of Mt. Majidan, were charged; the lady with bigamy and the men with abetment of bigamy. The Courts below have given Mt. Majidan the benefit of Section 562 of the Criminal P.C. as a first offender. The second husband Himayat Ullah was acquitted on the ground that it was not proved whether he had known of the first marriage or not. Shafi Ullah was the only one convicted and he was given four months rigorous imprisonment. He appeals. In order to succeed in a prosecution for abetment of bigamy the prosecution must prove that the person who is alleged to have committed bigamy was married lawfully once and has gone through a second marriage ceremony. Thirdly that the person alleged to have abetted the bigamy knew when he arranged or assisted at the second marriage that 'the person who was remarried had contracted a valid first marriage and that the husband or wife of the first marriage was still living. It appears to me that this conviction cannot be sustained. In the first place in my opinion Mt. Majidan was never validly married to Tufail Ahmad. The girl was a minor. She appointed her own vakil. This by itself was enough to invalidate the marriage. No minor can appoint an attorney, and if she does that attorney has no valid appointment under which he can act. On his ground alone there could be no bigamy and therefore no abetment of bigamy. The learned Judge in the Court below himself says that the points of law arising in the matter are distinctly technical and oan be more appropriately dealt with by the civil Court and further he says as regards Himayat Ullah:
|
What does 'Dr. Ranjit Kumar Bhattacharyya vs Smt. Sabita Bhattacharyya on 22 December, 1995' say about Void marriage?
|
The defendant No. I/appellant in his written statement, however, categorically denied and disputed the allegations of the plaintiff that she was her lawfully married wife and that he had any obligation to maintain her and that the alleged marriage had taken place at all, but admitted that the plaintiff/respondent, who was a widow, became intimate with the appellant and a child was born out of the intimacy, but he never induced the plaintiff to marry him and no marriage was ever solemnised between them. In fact the defendant No. 1 and the added defendant Smt. Purnima Bhatta-chitryya were Indian Christians by birth and they were married according to the Christian rites on or about 3rd February, 1945 at St. Johns Church, Calcutta and the marriage was still subsisting. The added defendant/ respondent No. 2 Smt. Purnima Bhatta-charyya in her written statement, also denied and disputed the plaint case altogether and categorically stated inter alia that she and the defendant No. 1/appellant were Indian Christians by birth and a marriage solemnised between them on 3rd February, 1945 at St. Johns Church, Calcutta according to the Christian rites and customs and the said marriage is now still subsisting.
|
What does 'Dinesh vs State Of Haryana on 25 April, 2014' say about dowry?
|
Assailing the impugned judgment of conviction, Mr. Rishi
Malhotra, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, firstly
contended that in absence of evidence that the deceased soon before her
|
What does 'Rohtash vs State Of Haryana on 22 May, 2012' say about dowry?
|
Facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are that:
A. On 4.7.1989 at 8.00 p.m., Jiwan (PW.1) made a statement
(Ext.PC) before the police at Rohtak Chowk, Kharkohda to the effect
|
What does 'Arun Singh vs State Of U.P. on 10 February, 2020' say about dowry?
|
Shorn of unnecessary details the brief facts which led to the filling of
Respondent No. 2 lodged First Information Report with Police
herein which was registered as case crime No. 431 of 201The
|
What does 'Bhola Ram vs State Of Punjab on 11 November, 2013' say about dowry?
|
At the time of their marriage, Janki Devi’s family gave
their means to Darshan Ram and his family. But according to the
prosecution, his brothers Parshottam Ram and Bhola Ram (the appellant) and
|
What does 'Bansi Lal vs State Of Haryana on 14 January, 2011' say about dowry?
|
Facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the
appellant was married to Sarla (deceased) on 4th April, 198An FIR
was lodged by Shyam Lal (PW.4) father of Sarla (deceased) on 25th
|
What does 'Manohar Lal vs State Of Haryana on 1 July, 2014' say about dowry?
|
Raj Rani (PW.1), mother of the deceased- Darshana @Phullan stated
that the accused married her daughter about five years back. The accused
used to harass her daughter on account of inadequacy of
|
What does 'Smt. Sahana Pal vs U.K.Samanta on 24 July, 2015' say about dowry?
|
The petitioner averred that after the marriage, she was taken to
Bombay (Mumbai) at the matrimonial house on 10.11.2006, after a short trip
to Kullu-Manali. At the time of marriage, the respondent represented that he
|
What does 'Mangat Ram vs State Of Haryana on 27 March, 2014' say about dowry?
|
We did not have the advantage of hearing any counsel on the side of
the State, even though, the hearing was going on for a couple of days.
Learned counsel appearing for the appellant took us through the depositions
|
What does 'Wasim vs State Nct Of Delhi on 18 July, 2019' say about dowry?
|
The deceased Moniya who was working as a teacher
was married to the Appellant on 02.05.201PW-11 Sunita
deposed that her daughter Moniya was being harassed by
|
What does 'Gangadharan vs T.K. Thankam on 27 January, 1988' say about divorce?
|
It is the common case of both parties that the appellant married the respondent on 30-8-1976 at Athavanad in Malappuram District. In the petition the appellant averred that immediately after the marriage the appellant took the respondent to his place of work at Kodumba in Palghat District and both of them were residing as husband and wife. According to the appellant soon after they started to live together at Kodumba she began to behave towards him in cruel manner. She also misbehaved towards the neighbours. In the circumstances the appellant was forced to apply for a transfer and accordingly he was transferred and posted at Pannikottur in 1977 and both of them started to reside at Pannikottur. According to the appellant the respondent continued her misbehaviour there also. She refused to cook food for him, to wash his clothes and also to talk with the appellant. She used to run out of the house and create scenes at night. She also used to threaten the appellant that she would commit suicide unless she was sent home. The appellant also alleged that on 13-8-1977 the respondent went away from his house and did not come back to resume cohabitation thereafter. On 24-9-1979 the respondent came to appellant's dispensary at about 5 P.M. along with her father's brother, father's brother's son Velayudhan and some others. She abused the appellant, broke her Thali-chain and threw the same at the appellant. She also took away the utensils belonging to her as well as the wedding ring she had put on the appellant's finger. Thereafter the appellant tried for a settlement and customary
|
Section 4 in The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961
|
Section Section 4 in The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 Penalty for demanding dowry.— If any person demands, directly or indirectly, from the parents or other relatives or guardian of a bride or bridegroom, as the case may be, any dowry, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months, but which may extend to two years and with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees: Provided that the court may, for adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than six months.
|
What does the article 'Gurudas v State of Maharashtra on 20 October 2015' say about marriage law?
|
the said judgment and order, the appellant is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code and is directed suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, to suffer further RI for one month. Appellant is also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code and is directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default, to suffer further RI for two months. Appellant is also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 376 (n) of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 4 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and is directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default, to suffer further RI for two months. Learned Judge directed that all the sentences shall run concurrently.Bandu Raut (PW 2) is the first-informant. He reached to Police - Station, Gondpipri on 7.9.201On that day, Ashok Bambole (PW 8), ASI was attached to the said Police Station. P.W. 2 Bandu gave his oral report. The same was reduced into writing by ASI Bambole (PW 8). Oral report is at exhibit 1The said oral report since was disclosing commission of a cognizable offence, crime was registered as Crime No.47/2013 for the offences punishable under Sections 363 and 366 (a) of the Indian Penal Code. Printed FIR is at exhibit 15.
|
Section 3 in The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961
|
Union of India - Section Section 3 in The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 Penalty for giving or taking dowry.— If any person, after the commencement of this Act, gives or takes or abets the giving or taking of dowry, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years, and with fine which shall not be less than fifteen thousand rupees or the amount of the value of such dowry, whichever is more: Provided that the Court may, for adequate and special reasons to be recorded in the judgment, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than five years. Nothing in sub-section shall apply to, or in relation to,— (a) presents which are given at the time of a marriage to the bride (without any demand having been made in that behalf): Provided that such presents are entered in a list maintained in accordance with the rules made under this Act; (b) presents which are given at the time of a marriage to the bridegroom (without any demand having been made in that behalf): Provided that such presents are entered in a list maintained in accordance with the rules made under this Act: Provided further that where such presents are made by or on behalf of the bride or any person related to the bride, such presents are of a customary nature and the value thereof is not excessive having regard to the financial status of the person by whom, or on whose behalf, such presents are given.
|
Section 304B in The Indian Penal Code, 1860
|
Union of India - Section Section 304B in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 304B. Dowry death.— Where the death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years of her marriage and it is shown that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, such death shall be called “dowry death”, and such husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused her death. Explanation.— For the purpose of this sub-section, “dowry” shall have the same meaning as in section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (28 of 1961). Whoever commits dowry death shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life.
|
What does 'Section 226 in The Income Tax Act, 1961' say about custody?
|
- [Where no certificate has been drawn up under section 222, the Assessing Officer may recover the tax by any one or more of the modes provided in this section.(1-A) Where a certificate has been drawn up under section 222, the Tax Recovery Officer may, without prejudice to the modes of recovery specified in that section, recover the tax by any one or more of the modes provided in this section.][ Substituted by Act 4 of 1988, Section 88, for sub-Section (w.r.e.f. 1.4.1988).]
|
What does 'Section 3 in Income Tax Rules, 1962' say about Maintenance?
|
- For the purpose of computing the income chargeable under the head "Salaries", the value of perquisites provided by the employer directly or indirectly to the assessee (hereinafter referred to as employee) or to any member of his household by reason of his employment shall be determined in accordance with the following sub-rules, namely:-
The value of residential accommodation provided by the employer during the previous year shall be determined on the basis provided in the Table below (See page 1.39) :
Central Government or any State Government to the employees
|
What does 'Section 2 in The Goa Children's Act, 2003' say about sexual issues?
|
- In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,-
[In place of words 'authorized officer' the words 'special officers' substituted by Goa Children's (Amendment) Act, 2005 [Act No. 20 of 2005].]
means officers that are appointed as such under the provisions of this Act;
|
What does 'Section 4 in The Repealing and Amending Act, 2017' say about divorce?
|
- The repeal by this Act of any enactment shall not affect any other enactment in which the repealed enactment has been applied, incorporated or referred to;
and this Act shall not affect the validity, invalidity, effect or consequences of anything already done or suffered, or any right, title, obligation or liability already acquired, accrued or incurred, or any remedy or proceeding in respect thereof, or any release or discharge of or from any debt, penalty, obligation, liability, claim or demand, or any indemnity already granted, or the proof of any past act or thing;
nor shall this Act affect any principle or rule of law, or established jurisdiction, form or course of pleading, practice or procedure, or existing usage, custom, privilege, restriction, exemption, office or appointment, notwithstanding that the same respectively may have been in any manner affirmed or recognised or derived by, in or from any enactment hereby repealed;
|
What does 'Section 4 in The Repealing and Amending Act, 2017' say about Inheritance rights divorce?
|
- The repeal by this Act of any enactment shall not affect any other enactment in which the repealed enactment has been applied, incorporated or referred to;and this Act shall not affect the validity, invalidity, effect or consequences of anything already done or suffered, or any right, title, obligation or liability already acquired, accrued or incurred, or any remedy or proceeding in respect thereof, or any release or discharge of or from any debt, penalty, obligation, liability, claim or demand, or any indemnity already granted, or the proof of any past act or thing;nor shall this Act affect any principle or rule of law, or established jurisdiction, form or course of pleading, practice or procedure, or existing usage, custom, privilege, restriction, exemption, office or appointment, notwithstanding that the same respectively may have been in any manner affirmed or recognised or derived by, in or from any enactment hereby repealed;
|
What does 'Sridhar Dey vs Kalpana Dey on 22 September, 1986' say about Restitution of conjugal rights?
|
, Hindu Marriage Act, in favour of the respondent-wife and against the appellant-husband, Mr. Mitra, the learned Counsel for the appellant-husband, has very seriously urged that there was no marriage in fact between the parties to warrant the decree and that, even if there was a marriage in fact, there was no marriage in law as ceremonies essential to constitute a Hindu marriage have not been proved to have been preformed in this case. Having heard the learned Counsel for both the parties at considerable length and having gone through the records ourselves, we are, however, satisfied that a marriage, both in fact and in law, between the parties has been satisfactorily proved to warrant the decree under appeal.It must be noted that long before the aforesaid Privy Council decision in Mouji Lal (supra), a Division Bench of this Court adopted and applied that principle in a case relating toIn that case the lower appellate court dismissed the suit as there was no positive evidence that Saptapadi was performed, but the Division Bench on second appeal held that the lower appellate court having found that "there was a marriage", "ought to have presumed, in the absence of anything to the contrary, that the marriage was good in law and that all the necessary ceremonies were performed" and for this the Division Bench relied on an earlier decision of the Privy Council in Inderan v. Rama Swamy (1869) 13 Moo Ind App 141 at p. 158.
|
What does 'Inderjit Kaur vs Rajinder Singh on 16 April, 1980' say about Restitution of conjugal rights?
|
, in particular, it has been repeatedly held that a decree cannot be passed unless all the requirements ofof the Hindu Marriage Act are established to the satisfaction of the court : seeSmt. Shanti Devi v. Balbir Singh Gupta and another
|
What does 'Bini vs Sundaran on 12 December, 2007' say about (Hindu marital?
|
, the Rules framed by the High Court and the State, the amendedwould clearly show the role of conciliation for reconciliation/settlement of disputes in family affairs. The primary object is to promote and preserve the sacred union of parties to a marriage. Only if the attempts for reconciliation are not fruitful, the further attempt on agreement on disagreement shall be made by way of settlement. Resolution of the disputes between the parties to a marriage on grounds available under law should be gone into only after the procedure under the Rules is followed through the counsellors to find out the possibility of reconciliation of the parties to the marriage or settlements of their disputes, however grave be the ground for separation. When a man and a woman are called upon to be one, though ideally one would expect them to be one for all purposes, differences of opinion are bound to be there on various grounds. After all, it is a fusion of two personalities. In the event of such bickerings, even if a party to a marriage is entitled to succeed on any of the available grounds under law, the Family Courts shall first make an attempt for reconciliation and if that fails, a further attempt for settlement and thereafter only proceed to the trial. It is one thing to say that a party is entitled to get relief on any of the available grounds under law but it is yet another thing to say that de hors the legal entitlement, reconciliation/settlement ignoring such legal grounds is possible. A settlement in a matrimonial dispute need hot necessarily be based on strict legal grounds but more on what the parties perceive on a just and reasonable settlement bases on mutual concessions. Such a compromise acceptable to the parties need not also coincide with the terms of a legally correct decision. If the law expects that refinement, reconciliation and settlement is to be first attempted, without following such a procedure, the Family Court shall not dispose of the suit or proceedings before it either granting the relief or declining the relief on the entitlement or disentitlement on legal grounds. It is not necessary that by mere conversion theal tie should be broken. In a secular country like India and a literate State like Kerala where mixed marriage itself is a well accepted course, on the mere ground of conversion to another religion of one of the
|
What does 'G.Nityanandam vs Tmt.D.Saritha on 16 April, 2013' say about guardianship?
|
:- Both the parents may jointly, or, in the event of the absence of one due to death, divorce, legal separation, desertion or conviction, may singly apply for
of their or as the case may be, his ward beyond the age of 18 years.
In the event of death, desertion, conviction of both the parents, the siblings (including half and step-siblings) jointly or singly (by reason of single application to be explained separately), may apply for
|
What does 'Smt. Nupur vs Sandeep Sud on 8 March, 2002' say about interim maintenance?
|
. for permitting her to sue as an indigent person. Relief claimed in the petition is for the grant of. Along with this petition an application for grant ofduring the pendency of these proceedings, as well as the suit in the event of permission being allowed, has also been filed.
|
What does 'Smt. Nupur vs Sandeep Sud on 8 March, 2002' say about interim maintenance?
|
. for permitting her to sue as an indigent person. Relief claimed in the petition is for the grant of. Along with this petition an application for grant ofduring the pendency of these proceedings, as well as the suit in the event of permission being allowed, has also been filed.
|
What does 'Bai Jivi vs Narsing Lalbhai on 14 October, 1926' say about Restitution of conjugal rights?
|
. Nevertheless, it shows that abandonment of a wife may entitle her to separate maintenance from her husband., (1923) I.L.R. 46 All. 210 where the facts were somewhat similar to those here. There the plaintiff, who was a Brahman, had many years ago turned his wife out of doors because he suspected her chastity. The wife went to live with her uncle, who supported her. Later on, she applied for and obtained an order for maintenance underof the Code of Criminal Procedure against her husband. During these proceedings the husband still refused to take his wife back stating at the time that he suspected her chastity. When, however, the wife began to execute her decree for maintenance, the husband proceeded to file a suit for
|
What does 'Mrs.Yamuna Dhevi vs Mrs.D.Nalini' say about (Hindu marital?
|
. So when a deceased male member dies and the wife survives him, she is class I heir. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that in view of the fact that the petition for divorce was submitted before the death of Rajendra Prasad, she should be deemed to have been divorced and that the plaintiff was not the wife at the time of the death of Rajendra Prasad. This argument cannot be accepted. The wife continues to be the wife till theal life is broken by a decree under the proceedings of the. Any transaction or any document showing a divorce cannot be accepted in the eye of law, unless a decree is granted under the
|
What does 'Section 7 in The Payment Of Wages Act, 1936' say about custody?
|
.-Notwithstanding the provisions of [the Railways Act, 1989 (, Section 6, for " sub-Section of Section 47 of the Indian Railways Act, 1890 (9 of 1890)" .], the wages of an employed person shall be paid to him without deductions of any kind except those authorised by or under this Act.
|
What does 'Section 13 in The Central Sales Tax Act, 1956' say about custody?
|
.-The Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make rules providing for-the manner in which application for registration may be made under this Act, the particulars to be contained therein, the procedure for the grant of such registration, the circumstances in which registration may be refused and the form in which the certificate of registration may be given;[ the manner of determination of the sale price and the deductions from the total consideration for a works contract under the proviso to clause (h) of section 2;]
|
What does 'Section 31 in The Special Marriage Act, 1954' say about divorce?
|
.[Every petition under Chapter V or Chapter VI shall be presented to the district Court within the local limits of whose original civil jurisdiction
the respondent, at the time of the presentation of the petition, resides; or
the parties to the marriage last resided together; or
|
What does 'Section 25 in The SpecialMarriageAct, 1954' say about voidable marriage?
|
.Any marriage solemnized under this Act shall be voidable and may be annulled by a decree of nullity ifthe marriage has not been consummated owing to the wilful refusal of the respondent to consummate the marriage; orthe respondent was at the time of the marriage pregnant by some person other than the petitioner; or
|
What does 'Section 53 in The Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920' say about marriage?
|
.Any transfer of property not being a transfer made before and in consideration of marriage or made in favour of a purchaser or incumbrancer in good faith and for valuable consideration shall, if the transferor is adjudged insolvent [on a petition presented]
within two years after the date of the transfer, be voidable as against the receiver and may be annulled by the Court.
|
What does 'Section 44 in The Special Marriage Act, 1954' say about Bigamy?
|
.Every person whose marriage is solemnized under this Act and who, during the lifetime of his or her wife or husband, contracts any other marriage shall be subject to the penalties provided in section 494 and section 495 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), for the offence of marrying again during the lifetime of a husband or wife, and the marriage so contracted shall be void.
|
What does 'Section 2 in The Mental Health Act, 1987' say about marriage?
|
.In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,cost of maintenance, in relation to a mentally ill person admitted in a psychiatric hospital or psychiatric nursing home, shall mean the cost of such items as the State Government may, by general or special order, specify in this behalf;District Court means, in any area for which there is a City Civil Court, that Court, and in any other area the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction, and includes any other Civil Court which the State Government may, by notification, specify as the Court competent to deal with all or any of the matters specified in this Act;
|
What does 'Section 40 in The Special Marriage Act, 1954' say about Judicial separation,?
|
.Subject to the other provisions contained in this Act, and to such rules as the High Court may make in this behalf, all proceedings under this Act shall be regulated, as far as may be, by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908).[40-A. Power to transfer petitions in certain cases[Sections, 40-A, 40-B and 40-C inserted by Act 68 of 1976, Section 38 (w.e.f. 27.5.1976).]
|
What does 'Section 16 in The SpecialMarriageAct, 1954' say about marriage?
|
.Upon receipt of an application signed by both the parties to the marriage for the registration of their marriage under this Chapter, the Marriage Officer shall give public notice thereof in such manner as may be prescribed and after allowing a period of thirty days for objections and after hearing any objection received within the period, shall, if satisfied that all the conditions mentioned in section 15 are fulfilled, enter a certificate of the marriage in the Marriage Certificate Book in the Form specified in the Fifth Schedule, and such certificate shall be signed by the parties to the marriage and by three witnesses.
|
What does 'Section 5 in The SpecialMarriageAct, 1954' say about marriage?
|
.When a marriage is intended to be solemnized under this Act, the parties to the marriage shall give notice thereof in writing in the Form specified in the Second Schedule to the Marriage Officer of the district in which at least one of the parties to the marriage has resided for a period of not less than thirty days immediately preceding the date on which such notice is given.
|
What does 'Section 22 in The SpecialMarriageAct, 1954' say about marriage?
|
.When either the husband or the wife has, without reasonable excuse, withdrawn from the society of the other, the aggrieved party may apply by petition to the district Court for restitution of conjugal rights, and the Court, on being satisfied of the truth of the statements made in such petition, and that there is no legal ground why the application should not be granted, may decree restitution of conjugal rights accordingly.
[Added by Act 68 of 1976, Section 23 (w.e.f. 27.5.1976).]
.Where a question arises whether there has been reasonable excuse for withdrawal from the society, the burden of proving reasonable excuse shall be on the person who has withdrawn from the society.]
|
What does 'Section 22 in The Special Marriage Act, 1954' say about Restitution of conjugal rights?
|
.When either the husband or the wife has, without reasonable excuse, withdrawn from the society of the other, the aggrieved party may apply by petition to the district Court for restitution of conjugal rights, and the Court, on being satisfied of the truth of the statements made in such petition, and that there is no legal ground why the application should not be granted, may decree restitution of conjugal rights accordingly.[Added by Act 68 of 1976, Section 23 (w.e.f. 27.5.1976).].Where a question arises whether there has been reasonable excuse for withdrawal from the society, the burden of proving reasonable excuse shall be on the person who has withdrawn from the society.]
|
What does 'Section 30 in The Special Marriage Act, 1954' say about divorce?
|
.Where a marriage has been dissolved by a decree of divorce, and either there is no right of appeal against the decree or if there is such a right of appeal, the time for appealing has expired without an appeal having been presented or an appeal has been presented but has been dismissed, [* * * *]
[The words "and one year has elapsed thereafter but not sooner," omitted by Act 68 of 1976, Section 31 (w.e.f. 27.5.1976).]
|
What does 'Section 36 in The Special Marriage Act, 1954' say about Alimony?
|
.Where in any proceeding under Chapter V or Chapter VI it appears to the district Court that the wife has no independent income sufficient for her support and the necessary expenses of the proceeding, it may, on the application of the wife, order the husband to pay to her the expenses of the proceeding, and weekly or monthly during the proceeding such as having regard to the husbands income, it may seem to the Court to be reasonable:
[Provided that the application for the payment of the expenses of the proceeding and such weekly or monthly sum during the proceeding under Chapter V or Chapter VI, shall, as far as possible, be disposed of within sixty days from the date of service of notice on the husband.]
[Inserted by Act 49 of 2001, Section 6 (w.e.f. 24.9.2001).]
|
What does 'Section 36 in The SpecialMarriageAct, 1954' say about marriage?
|
.Where in any proceeding under Chapter V or Chapter VI it appears to the district Court that the wife has no independent income sufficient for her support and the necessary expenses of the proceeding, it may, on the application of the wife, order the husband to pay to her the expenses of the proceeding, and weekly or monthly during the proceeding such as having regard to the husbands income, it may seem to the Court to be reasonable:
[Provided that the application for the payment of the expenses of the proceeding and such weekly or monthly sum during the proceeding under Chapter V or Chapter VI, shall, as far as possible, be disposed of within sixty days from the date of service of notice on the husband.]
[Inserted by Act 49 of 2001, Section 6 (w.e.f. 24.9.2001).]
|
What does 'Lawyers Beyond Borders (Lbb) India vs Union Of India on 25 August, 2020' say about sexual issues?
|
· Asylum Cases · Birth Certificate
· Compensation · Contract Problems
· Domestic Help · Dubious Job
|
What does 'K G vs State Of Delhi & Anr. on 16 November, 2017' say about guardianship?
|
" It is apparent that the petitioner maliciously deceived
and hoodwinked the respondent by wrongfully retaining their
daughter at New Delhi. The petitioner disappeared on
|
What does 'Sarabjit Singh vs Charanjit Kaur on 30 May, 1996' say about (Hindu marital?
|
" .. the words 'wife' and 'husband' used in sub-section ofof the Act would include within their scope a woman and a man professing thefaith who have gone through a ceremony of marriage which would, in law, have conferred the status of a wife or husband oh them but for the provisions of S; 11 read with Cls. (i), (iv) and (v) of
|
What does 'Sreerangaraju.R vs Usha on 28 December, 2022' say about Live-in relationships?
|
" 3The Distinction between thenotwithstanding the fact that there areeven if they are not sharing a shared
|
What does 'M vs M S on 23 April, 2019' say about Restitution of conjugal rights?
|
" Keeping the above principles in view, we are of the opinionthat the intention of the legislature while amending the Act byAct, 44 of 1964 was that the non-resumption of cohabitation or
|
What does 'Sh. Bhag Singh vs Sh. Rafiq on 27 May, 2017' say about misuse of legal provisions?
|
" mere denial of ownership is no denial at all. It has to be something
more. The object of the requirement contained in clause (e ) that the
petitioner should be the owner of the premises is not to provide an
|
What does 'D.Velusamy vs D.Patchaiammal on 21 October, 2010' say about marriage?
|
"..the object is to prevent vagrancy and destitution. It
clothing and shelter to the deserted wife. When an
attempt is made by the husband to negative the claim of
|
What does 'Santosh Kumari vs Mohan Lal on 21 May, 1980' say about Judicial separation,?
|
"(1A). Either party to a marriage, whether solemnized before or after the commencement of this Act, may also present a petition for the dissolution of the marriage by a decree of divorce on the ground--(i) that there has been no resumption as between the parties to the marriage for a period of two years or upwards after the passing of a decree foration in a Proceeding to which they were parties; or
|
What does 'Sujata Gandhi vs S.B. Gandhi on 12 June, 2020' say about Live-in relationships?
|
"(s) "shared household" means a household where the person aggrievedeither singly or along with the respondent and includes such a household whether owned or tenanted either jointly by the aggrieved person and the respondent, or owned or tenanted by either of them in respect of which either the aggrieved person or the respondent or both jointly or singly have any right, title, interest or equality and includes such a household which may belong to the joint family of which the respondent is a member, irrespective of whether the respondent or the aggrieved person has any right, title or interest in the shared household."2Apart from the above, we are of the opinion that the house in question cannot be said to be a `shared household' within the meaning of
|
What does 'Santhini vs Vijaya Venketesh on 9 October, 2017' say about marriage?
|
“1To what extent the confidence and confidentiality will
be safeguarded and protected in video conferencing,
particularly when efforts are taken by the counsellors,
|
What does 'Sasikumar vs Bindu.S on 27 March, 2009' say about Judicial separation,?
|
"21-A. Power to transfer petitions in certain cases:--(a) a petition under this Act has been presented to adistrict Court having jurisdiction by a party to a marriage
|
What does 'Sheela George vs V.M.Alexander on 2 June, 2025' say about Alimony?
|
"37.Power to order permanent alimony.- Where a
of the parties, it thinks reasonable; and for that
A reading of Section 37 makes it clear that a divorced
|
What does 'Jasmeet Kaur vs Navtej Singh on 20 February, 2018' say about child abduction?
|
“3We must remind ourselves of the settled legalposition that the concept of forum convenience has noplace in wardship jurisdiction. Further, the efficacy
|
What does '"Apart From The Conflicting Opinions vs Uma Devi (Supra). The Judgment Begins on 23 May, 2014' say about Repression,?
|
"Apart From The Conflicting Opinions vs Uma Devi (Supra). The Judgment Begins on 23 May, 2014
In a case where a person secures 33 marks in educational qualification but entitled for 10 bonus marks shall have 33.1 (23.1 + 10) merit marks. This fellow will march over a person having 47% marks as the merit marks of this person shall be treated as 47 x 70/100 = 32.9.
The illustrations clearly indicate major role of bonus marks in elevating the merit marks to a very high level. True it is, the weightage against experience is having its importance and positive factors, but in no manner it may have absolute supremacy vis-a-vis the educational qualification. The educational qualification is the basic eligibility and the weightage is only an essence of experience. The essence can provide fragrance to a body but cannot be identified as body itself. The bonus marks to the extent of 30 as assigned by the respondents clearly indicates the throttling of educational merit by service experience. The bonus marks fixed by the respondents are not maintaining required balance with the educational qualification, as such the
|
What does 'Jayammal vs V.Kumar on 2 July, 2008' say about Void marriage?
|
"I am unable to agree with the contention of learned counsel for the appellants. There is a distinction between proof of
or by circumstantial evidence, one of the circumstances being long cohabitation and living together. But a
which is questioned on the ground of being subsequent to and during the subsistence of an earlier
|
What does 'Ranganatham vs Shyamala on 5 November, 1988' say about divorce?
|
"It is not competent to the Court dismissing a husband's petition for dissolution of marriage, to award maintenance to the wife, u/
. Though the wife might have filed an application for
of the Act, still in the absence of a decree for dissolution or judicial separation, no order for maintenance can be made under the Act,"
|
What does 'Ranganatham vs Shyamala on 5 November, 1988' say about Judicial separation,?
|
"It is not competent to the Court dismissing a husband's petition for dissolution of marriage, to award maintenance to the wife, u/. Though the wife might have filed an application for divorce orof the Act, still in the absence of a decree for dissolution or
|
What does 'J.Gnanakumar vs Joy Kanmani on 20 August, 2013' say about second marriage?
|
"It is significant to note that in Ex.A-16, the date of theis not mentioned. As the earliest document coming into existence after, one would have expected Meenakshisundaram to have
|
What does 'R vs J on 9 April, 2018' say about Judicial separation,?
|
„J‟ and „R‟ got married on 03rd July, 1978 and two childrenwere born out of their wedlock, namely a daughter, Pooja on 29thOctober, 1980 and a son, Raghav on 04th September, 198On 29th
|
What does 'Bhagwan Das vs The State & Ors. on 5 August, 2019' say about guardianship?
|
"Jurisdiction- Subject to the other provisions of this
Court having jurisdiction to entertain application.--
the person of the minor, it shall be made to the District
|
What does 'A. Yousuf Rawther vs Sowramma on 24 June, 1970' say about divorce?
|
"Marriage under Islam is but a civil contract, and not a sacrament, in the sense that those who are once joined in wed-lock can never be separated. It may be controlled, and under certain circumstances, dissolved by the will of the parties concerned. Public declaration is no doubt necessary, but it is not a condition of the validity of the marriage. Nor is any religious ceremony deemed absolutely essential."
(The Religion of Islam by Ahmad A. Galwash, p. 104). It is impossible to miss the touch of modernity about this provision; for, the features emphasised are precisely what we find in the civil marriage laws of advanced countries and also in the
43 of 195Religious ceremonies occur even in Muslim weddings although they are not absolutely essential. For that matter, many non-muslim marriages, (e.g. Marumakkathayees) also do not insist, for their validity, on religious ceremonies and registered marriages are innocent of priestly rituals. It is a popular fallacy that a Muslim male enjoys, under the Quaranic law, unbridled authority to liquidate the marriage. "The whole Quoran expressly forbids a man to seek pretexts for
|
What does 'A. Thangammal vs State Rep By on 6 February, 2008' say about Repression,?
|
"Power of Court to pass sentence of detention in Borstal School -
Where it appears to a Court having jurisdiction under this Act that
an adolescent offender should, by reason of his criminal habits or tendencies,
|
What does 'Section 27 in The SpecialMarriageAct, 1954' say about marriage?
|
"section 27" ANDD "limitation act" NOTT "adverse possession"
[Section 27 renumbered as sub-Section thereof by Act 29 of 1970, Section 3 (w.e.f. 12.8.1970).]
Subject to the provisions of this Act and to the rules made thereunder, a petition for divorce may be presented to the district Court either by the husband or the wife on the ground that the respondent
|
What does 'Section 164 in The Income Tax Act, 1961' say about Maintenance?
|
"section 27" ANDD "limitation act" NOTT "adverse possession"
16[ Charge of tax where share of beneficiaries unknown.
[Substituted by Act 19 of 1970, Section 21, for Section 164 (w.e.f. 1.4.1971).]
|
What does 'N K Tewari vs M/O Home Affairs on 18 May, 2016' say about Bigamy?
|
"That the said Shri N.K. Tiwari, while functioning as Assistant in
the Frontier Hqrs SSB Lucknow has married Smt. Seema, D/o
lat Shri Murlidhar resident of 138/136 at Fatehganj on 05.5.08
|
What does 'Prashant Ojha vs Shalu Ojha on 6 April, 2015' say about Domestic violence?
|
"The case as set out in appeal in brief, is that the
parties had married to each other on 20.04.2007 in Delhi.
They had stayed in hotel/Executive Farms for few days as
|
What does 'Darshan Gupta vs Radhika Gupta on 1 July, 2013' say about divorce?
|
“The Hon’ble Supreme Court, by the order dated 19.09.2011 directed us
to live happily for a period of six months. In pursuance to the
directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, my husband taken me into his
|
What does 'Saraswathy vs Babu on 25 November, 2013' say about Domestic violence?
|
“The primary question that arises for consideration is whether
acts committed prior to the coming into force of the
The High Court after taking into consideration the stand taken by the
|
What does 'Binu vs State Of Kerala on 17 July, 2002' say about Repression,?
|
"The question is whether protection for the individual would not be gained at a disproportionate loss of protection for society. On the one side is the social need that crime shall be
. On the other, the social need that law shall not be flouted by the insolence of office. There are dangers in any choice. The rule of the Adams case (People v. Adams, 176 NY 351) strikes a balance between opposing interests. We must hold it to be the law until those organs of Government by which a change of public policy is normally effected shall give notice to the courts that change has come to pass".
|
What does 'Saly Joseph vs Baby Thomas on 16 November, 1998' say about (Hindu marital?
|
"The question of capacity to marry and the impediments in the way of marriage would have to be resolved by referring to their personal law. That for the purpose of deciding the validity of the marriage, would be the law of the Roman Catholic Church, namely the Canon Law of that Church".The marriage was not annulled, as there was dispensation from prohibited degrees granted by the Bishop as per Canon Law. In Yumuna Bai Anantrao Adhav v. Ananthrao Shivram Adhav, (1988) 1 SCC 530 : (AIR 1988 SC 644) the Apex Court held that for determination of the validity of aal status, the personal law is to be relied upon. In Leelamma v. Dilipkumar (1992) I Ker LT 651 : AIR 1993 Kerala 57, a single Bench of this Court held, that in the absence of statutory law. Canon Law governs the members of the Syrian Catholic community. Thus the Courts in India have in clear terms laid down that the validity or otherwise of a marriage between Catholics would have to be decided by referring to the provisions of Canon Law in the absence of statutory law. Hence, it may safely be concluded that validity of the marriage, where the parties are Roman Catholic (Syrian Christians must be determined by resort to the provisions of their personal law. This is more so as solemnisation of Christian Marriages is done according to personal law in Travancore-Cochin areas of the State of Kerala and there is no
|
What does 'Kaka vs Hassan Bano And Anr. on 21 October, 1997' say about divorce?
|
"The statements in the text books viz. Mulla's Mohammedan Law (18th edition); Tyabji's Muslim Law (4th edition) are inadequate to establish the proposition that the Muslim husband is not under an obligation to provide for the maintenance of his
deals with cases in which, a person who is possessed to sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain, amongst others, his wife who is unable to maintain herself. Since the Muslim Personal Law, which limits the husband's liability to provide for the maintenance of the
wife to the period of Iddat, does not contemplate or countenance the situation envisaged by
|
What does 'Darshan Kumar vs Pushap Lata on 17 May, 2011' say about (Hindu marital?
|
"We have thus, in this light, no hesitation in coming to the viewthat juncture, while passing the decree, if undoubtedly has thepower to grant permanent alimony or maintenance, if that
|
What does 'P.Shanthi Kiran vs State Of Ap on 17 June, 2020' say about Void marriage?
|
"Wife" for the purposes of Chapter-IX means a legally wedded
legally wedded wife who was neglected by her husband. The
only exception is a divorced wife as per explanation (b) of
|
What does 'XXX And Ors vs ABC And Anr on 2 March, 2016' say about jointly owned assets?
|
"XXX" ]
Aged 33 years, Occ.: Business, ]
R/at 4-1-316, Residency Road, ]
|
What does 'Dy. Supdt. Of Police Cbi-Bsc 11 New Delhi vs R. Sitraman And Ors on 1 November, 2018' say about International custody issues?
|
( Constituted under the Special Court [Trial of Offences Relating to
(Presided Over By : Hon'ble Dr. Justice Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi)
Central Bureau of Investigation, ]
|
What does the article 'Imratlal v State of M.P. on 27 January 1986 - Judgement' say about marriage law?
|
(1.) The appellant, aggrieved by his conviction under S.376, Penal Code, recorded by the Sessions Judge, Shivpuri, in Session Trial No. 54 of 1979, judgment dated 12-11-1979, has preferred this appeal. The appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years only.(2.) Brief facts are that in village Dhamantuk lived a child girl Chhingo. She at or about 10.30 a.m. on 13-3-1979 was watching her wheat field on the outskirts of the village. The field of the appellant is also near the field of this child girl. The appellant proceeded to the spot where Chhingo was watching her field and invited her for a game, which she declined to participate. Upon this, the appellant threw Chhingo (PW. 3) down on the ground and ravished brutally. Due to this her private part was torn and she sustained injuries, consequent to which she started bleeding profusely and her underwear was soiled with blood. The appellant is alleged to have taken away the underwear from her body for washing near a well, but at the same time Bhabhuti (P.W. 7) arrived on the spot and the appellant ran away after leaving the soiled underwear near the well. She narrated the incident to Bhabhuti (PW. 7), who went to the village and informed the father of the prosecutrix, Jugru (P.W.1) about the incident. Jugru (PW. 1) arrived at the spot and saw his ravished daughter weeping and lying on the ground profusely bleeding from her delicate private part. Jugru (PW.1) lifted the prosecutrix, took her home and informed the villagers. According to Jugru (P.W. 1), while he was taking away his daughter in the company of the village Chowkidar to the police station, he was accosted by Meharban, Ramcharan, Akhesingh, Basanta and Balbhadra Thakur. These persons threatened him with dire consequences if he proceeded to the police station and lodged the report. Consequently, he returned, but he again went to police station Badarwas and lodged the report at 12-30 p.m. on 14-3-1979.(3.) The police, after the report, sent the prosecutrix for medial examination, and she was examined by Dr. (Smt.) Megha Moghe (PW. 9). Her blood soaked clothes and the vaginal slides were sent for chemical examination.
|
What does 'Yusuf Khan vs State Of M.P. on 4 October, 2018' say about rape?
|
(16) The prosecutrix (PW3) has stated that the complainantMullo Bai (PW2) and the prosecutrix (PW3) were going to JorasiTemple for offering prayer and they boarded a bus from Dabra
|
What does 'Kiran Kumar vs Ravinder Kumar on 7 March, 2020' say about guardianship?
|
(2.5) As per the terms and conditions of the agreement, the plaintiffs
were required to obtain necessary permission for sale of execution
Judge. Plaintiffs have requested time and again to defendants to
|
What does 'Bal Kishan vs Urmila on 30 August, 2001' say about Judicial separation,?
|
(2), a Division Bench of Gujaral High Court has observed that there must be some facts or circumstances occurring after the decree foration or restitution of conjugal rights showing that the petitioner was the defaulting parly and a wrong doer who was taking advantage of his own wrong. In that case, the husband against whom a decree foration was passed on the ground that he was leading an adulterous life, continued to live in adult and after expiry of the statutory period after the decree for
|
What does 'Prof.M.K.Surappa vs The Joint Secretary' say about sexual issues?
|
(2016) 12 SCC 451 wherein a senior Government Officer was proceeded
non-supply of copy of the inquiry report based on the complaint was raised,
the Union Government claimed privilege under Sections 123 and 124 of the
|
What does 'Inderjit Kaur vs Rajinder Singh on 16 April, 1980' say about Judicial separation,?
|
(23) Thirdly, and in any event, since the compromise resulted in a reconciliation, the right course for the court was to dismiss the petition and not to grant a decree. Ireach this conclusion as follows-ation or divorce is, pending, the parties become reconciled and decide to resume cohabitation. What order should the court make ? Obviously, the petition. has to be dismissed and no degree can be paused. But, why ? Clearly, because the petitioner no longer requires any relief from the court.(34) Restitution of conjugal Tights was unknown both to "Hindu and Mahommedan Jaw. It was an importation from the law of England where, too, it has now been abolished. For assessing whether this action should be retained in India at the present day, it is worth recalling its origin and history. This is succinctly summarised in paragraph 2 of the report of the English Law Commission as follows :
|
What does 'Inderjit Kaur vs Rajinder Singh on 16 April, 1980' say about divorce?
|
(29) In Halsbury's Laws of England (3rd edn.) volume' 12 page 284 paragraph 554 it is stated :
'AT any time after the commencement of proceedings for rcsutution of conjugal rights, the respondent may apply for an order to stay the proceedings on the ground that he is willing to resume or return to cohabitation. Such an application must be bona fide. and will not be permitted where the respondent is in contempt to the Court. A. decree will be granted where there has been a resumption of cohabitation for the purpose only of defeating the proceedings. Where there has been an effective bona fide offer to return to cohabitation, the petition may be dismissed.'
(10th edn.) at pages 253-254 and in Tolstoy on The Law and Practice of
|
What does 'Bachan Singh Etc. Etc vs State Of Punjab Etc. Etc on 16 August, 1982' say about Legal implications of adultery?
|
(A) Death Penalty, whether constitutionally valid ?-
Right to live, whether the provisions of section 302, Penal
between "Public order" and "Law and Order"-Whether section
|
What does 'Shri Inder Raj vs Nisha on 5 April, 2021' say about Share in matrimonial?
|
(A) Whether suit for possession can be instituted against a4The first aspect which arises for consideration iswhether in view of the right of Residence given to the defendant
|
What does 'Santosh Paswan Son Of Ramdin Paswan vs The State Of Jharkhand on 12 February, 2024' say about inter faith marriage?
|
(Against the judgment of conviction dated 24.06.2016 and order ofsentence dated 27.06.2016, passed by Additional Sessions Judge-IV,Santosh Paswan son of Ramdin Paswan, resident of Sector-II
|
What does 'Baby @ Rohini (Deceased) vs Kamalam Kumerasan on 5 August, 2015' say about Legal implications of adultery?
|
(Appellants 5 to 7 brought on record as LRs of the deceased
1st appellant vide order of the Court dated 29.01.2015
of the C.P.C., against the judgment and decree dated 22.02.2013 made in O.S.No.269 of 2004 on the file of the Vth Additional District and Sessions Court, Coimbatore.
|
What does 'Smt. Babita @ Gyatri vs Modprasad @ Pintu And Others on 12 September, 2017' say about Streedhan rights?
|
(Arising out of judgment/order dated 28.04.2016 passed in Misc. Civil
Suit No.08/2015 of the learned Family Court, Mahasamund)
· Smt. Babita @ Gyatri, W/o Modprasad @ Pintu Patel, Aged About
|
What does 'Shaurabh Kumar Tripathi vs Vidhi Rawal on 19 May, 2025' say about jointly owned assets?
|
(arising out of Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 9493 of 2024)
Shaurabh Kumar Tripathi … Appellant
Vidhi Rawal … Respondent
|
What does 'Lahari Sakhamuri vs Sobhan Kodali on 15 March, 2019' say about International custody issues?
|
(Arising out of SLP(Civil) No(s). 1589215893 of 2018)
LAHARI SAKHAMURI …..Appellant(s)
SOBHAN KODALI …..Respondent(s)
|
What does 'Lahari Sakhamuri vs Sobhan Kodali on 15 March, 2019' say about Right to residence marital?
|
(Arising out of SLP(Civil) No(s). 1589215893 of 2018)LAHARI SAKHAMURI …..Appellant(s)SOBHAN KODALI …..Respondent(s)
|
What does 'Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan vs The State Of Maharashtra on 20 March, 2018' say about misuse of legal provisions?
|
(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.)No.5661 of 2017)
DR. SUBHASH KASHINATH MAHAJAN …Appellant
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. …Respondents
|
End of preview. Expand
in Data Studio
README.md exists but content is empty.
- Downloads last month
- 2