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

2000 Supreme(SC) 1536

N.S.HEGDE, A.S.ANAND, K.G.BALAKRISHNAN
LAXMI DEVI – Appellant
Versus
RAJESH KUMAR SANADHYA – Respondent


( 1 ) THE parties were married on 3-3-1990. There are three children from the wedlock. It appears that relations between the parties got strained. The respondent has filed a suit under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage which is pending in the Family Court at Udaipur. According to the petitioner, she is living with her father along with the children born from the wedlock. She submits that it is not possible for her to defend herself properly at Udaipur and prays for the case to be transferred to mathura. Our attention has also been drawn by learned counsel for the petitioner to certain admissions made in the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent to the effect that he has embraced Islam religion.

( 2 ) WITHOUT expressing any opinion on the merits of the case between the parties, but keeping in view the affidavit filed in support of the application for transfer, it appears appropriate to us to allow this application but instead of transferring the case to the Court of District Judge, Mathura, in our opinion, it would be appropriate to transfer the case to the file of the District Judge, agra, who may either try the case himself or assign it to any ot




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