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

1994 Supreme(Del) 386

MAHINDER NARAIN
RANJINI MOORTHY – Appellant
Versus
MURSHID ABDULLAH MOHAMMND – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ANIL KHER

MAHINDER NARAIN

( 1 ) THE plaintiff has filed the present suit for declaration, stating that she was born on 06. 11. 1969, and that she is a Hindu by religion. It is also stated that the plaintiff was studying in Maharaja Siyaji Rao University, Baroda in the 1st year of Law when she met the defendant in August, 1992, who was also studying in 1st year of law. It is asserted by the plaintiff that she came under the undue influence of the defendant while studying in the LL. B. 1st year course. The plaintiff wants to dissolve the marriage which, according to the plaintiff, was performed on 11. 08. 1992 between the plaintiff and the defendant according to muslim rites at New Delhi.

( 2 ) IT is also asserted by the plaintiff that no specific ceremonies or rites were performed. Nor her free consent was obtained. It s also asserted that she was required to sign a "nikahnama" which she signed under the influence of the defendant and in the presence of a Qazi Bismil Nizami at 105, Fana Manzil, Basti Hazrat Nizamuddin, New Delhi. It is also asserted that at the time of performance of the marriage, some friends of the defendant were present, but none was present from the side of the plaintiff.





















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