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

1998 Supreme(AP) 45

B.SUBHASHAN REDDY, T.RANGA RAO
R. Durga Prasad – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


( 1 ) IN this writ petition, the constitutional validity of clause (a) of explanation to Section 7 (1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 relating to causes under Section 12 (1) (c) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is challenged as violative of Articles 14 and 21 of Indian Constitution.

( 2 ) WE will mention some facts leading to filing of this writ petition. Petitioner is the husband and the 2nd Respondent is his wife. Both were married according to Hindu rites on 30-10-1996. But, shortly thereafter there was strained relationship and in the same year, OP No. 408 of 1996 was filed by the 2nd Respondent before the Family Court, Visakhapatnam stating so many facts and pleading invalidity of the marriage on the ground that the marriage was not according to her free will and consent, but by force and fraud and that the marriage was void and a nullity. A criminal complaint in Cr. No. 258 of 1996 has also been filed. But, that is a question apart. The further complaint of the petitioner is that even though, he had filed IA No. 345 of 1997 seeking assistance of an advocate to conduct the case on his behalf, the same was dismissed and CRP No. 2108 of 1997 filed against the same was withdrawn and t














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