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

2023 Supreme(Del) 3633

SURESH KUMAR KAIT, NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
Mohinderjeet Kaur – Appellant
Versus
Arvind Jassi @ Arvind Kumar Jassi – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Mr. Gaurav Puri, Mr. Sarthak Gupta and Mr. Saksham Thareja, Advocates, for the Appellant.

JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. CM Appl. 3453/2019 under Section 5 read with Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 has been filed by the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 4133 days in filing the appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 read with Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for setting aside the Order and Judgment dated 28.05.2007 vide which the learned Additional District Judge has allowed the divorce by mutual consent under Section 13(B)(2) of the Hindu marriage Act, 1955 (in short, the `HMA').

2. It is submitted in the application that the divorce by mutual consent under Section 13(B)(2) of the HMA was granted by the learned Additional District Judge vide Order and Decree dated 28.05.2007. It is claimed that the Decree of divorce was obtained by making the appellant believe that the said proceedings were necessary for the appellant to be able to visit and reside in Italy with the respondent. Believing the representation to be true and without the knowledge of the proceedings, she participated in the proceedings for divorce by Mutual Consent.

3. Subsequently, she came to know that a fraud has been committed upon her. She contacted her lawyer who filed

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