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

1994 Supreme(AP) 130

I.P.RAO
Lydia Renuka – Appellant
Versus
K. Soloman Raju – Respondent


IMMANENI PANDURANGA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THIS application is filed under Section 37 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 seeking a direction to the respondent to pay the applicant a sum of Rs. 2,000/-per month towards alimony. Section 37 applies only to cases where a decree absolute is passed declaring the marriage to be dissolved or on any decree of judicial separation obtained by the wife. The prayer in O. P. No. 3 of 1992 is for declaring the marriage null and void. That prayer having been allowed, the legal effect is that the marriage does not exist. The marriage said to have taken place between the applicant and the respondent being a nullity and non-est, the marital relationship between the applicant and the respondent as wife and husband does not exist at any time and as such, the question of directing the respondent to pay alimony does not arise.

( 2 ) THAT is obiously the reason why the legislature, under Section 37 of the Indian Divorce Act, has limited the power to order permanent alimony only in cases of a decree absolute declaring the marriage to be dissolved or any decree of judicial separation obtained by the wife. The same relief is not sanctioned by the legislature in respect o

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