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

1988 Supreme(Cal) 229

AJIT KUMAR NAYAK, A.M.BHATTACHARJEE
APURBA – Appellant
Versus
MANASHI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
R.N.DAS MOHAPATRA, SUDHANSU SEKHAR BOSE

A. M. BHATTACHARJEE, J.

( 1 ) THE appellant-husband petitioned against the wife-respondent in court below for dissolution of the marriage on the ground of her alleged mental disorder and the petition having been dismissed, the husband has preferred this appeal to this Court. But both the parties have now filed a joint-petition before us praying that the marriage between them may be dissolved by a decree of divorce on compromise on the terms and conditions contained therein. The question that has accordingly arisen for our consideration is whether such a course is permissible under the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

( 2 ) UNDER S. 21 of the Hindu Marriage Act, "all proceedings under this Act shall be regulated, as far as may be, by the Civil P. C. '', which would accordingly include O. 23, R. 3 of the Code, providing for compromise of suit. But as indicated in S. 21 itself in its opening words, the Civil P. C. would apply ''subject to the other provisions contained in this Act", and as provided in R. 3 of O. 23 of the Code, the Rule would apply only when the Court is satisfied that the "agreement or compromise", on the basis of which the proceeding is sought to be dec









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