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

1967 Supreme(Kar) 20

A.R.SOMNATH IYER, AHMED ALI KHAN
SIDDAGANGIAH – Appellant
Versus
LAKSHAMMA – Respondent


( 1 ) THE appellant is a husband whose application against his wife under Section 9 of the Hindu marriage Act, 1955 for a decree for restitution of conjugal rights, was dismissed by the Civil judge, (After stating the facts in paras 2 and 3, the judgment proceeded :

( 2 ) THE only two witnesses who gave evidence in the proceeding are the two spouses. (After discussing the evidence in Paras, 4, 5, 6 and 7, their Lordships observed ).

( 3 ) HOWEVER that may be, the fact remains that after the spouses lived together happily for five or six years, their marriage went on the rocks. We should ask ourselves why the matrimonial career of the spouses was wrecked in that way. An important piece of evidence which provides us with the key to the solution is the evidence of the husband and that given by the wife that after the wife went to her parent's house there was a complaint against the husband to the police charging him with cruelty. The husband admitted--and that is the effect of what he stated--that he had been warned by the police against such indulgence, and he denied that he had been warned by the police against such indulgence, and he denied that he had thereafter again indulged in






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