SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1994 Supreme(SC) 675

P.B.SAWANT, YOGESHWAR DAYAL
Anil Kumar Mahsi – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


Advocates:
D.K.GARG, K.K.VENUGOPAL, K.VISHVANATHA RAO

Judgment

SAWANT, J.- The hearing of this petition is confined only to examining the vires of Section 10 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The petitioner was married to Respondent 2, Monika on 8-10-1986 as per the Christian rites in a Methodist Church at Muzaffarpur in Bihar. After marriage, the parties returned to Delhi on 10-10-1986 Respondent-Monika, however, left the matrimonial home on 26-12-1986, i.e., two months and a fortnight thereafter and never returned to it again. It is not in dispute (respondent-Monika has not filed any counter to the petition) that the parties have been living separately since the day of the desertion by Monika on 26-12-1986 as alleged in the petition. The petitioner further alleges that she has been working as a teacher in St. Mary Girls High School, Deogarh, Bihar.

2. In spite of notice to respondent-Monika and intimation to her that the petitioner had deposited Rs 3000 for her costs in attending the Court and the assistance of a Senior Advocate, Shri K.K. Venugopal is given to her to conduct her case, she has neither filed counter, nor attended the Court. On the other hand, by a letter of 5-1-1993 she has intimated























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top