Back
J.B.PARDIWALA, VIRESHKUMAR B.MAYANI
Tarif Rashidbhai Qureshi – Appellant
Versus
Asmabanu d/o Alimohmmad Idarbhai Qureshi and w/o Tarif Rashidbhai Qureshi – Respondent
Statutes Discussed
No relevant statutes found in the judgment text.
Case Laws Discussed
No relevant case laws found in the judgment text.
Ratio Decidendi
No relevant ratio decidendi found in the judgment text.
Court Observations
No relevant court observations found in the judgment text.
Final Conclusion
No relevant final conclusion found in the judgment text.
Specific questions/aspects raised by the legal query: Does the duration of marriage (specifically 15 years) affect a wife's entitlement to maintenance, such that she is not entitled after 15 years?
The judgment text primarily addresses a Muslim wife's right to divorce under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939, and her entitlement to lump sum permanent maintenance/alimony under Section 3(1)(a) of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, in a case where the marriage lasted approximately 1 year before breakdown (married 13-06-2009, suit filed ~2017). The Family Court awarded Rs.10,00,000 as lifetime lump sum maintenance, and the High Court upheld this on appeal.
Relevant passages considered but excluded for weak/tangential relevance: - (!) : Mentions "Duration of marriage – marriages that lasted for more than 10 years are entitled to a lifetime alimony." (Somewhat related as it discusses duration generally, but supports longer marriages entitling wife to maintenance, directly contradicting the query's proposition; not specific to 15 years or denial of maintenance.) - Marriage facts (!) , (!) : ~1-year effective duration before separation; court still awarded maintenance (contradicts query but on short marriage, not 15 years).
All categories excluded as no findings directly or substantially address whether a wife loses maintenance entitlement after 15 years of marriage. The judgment does not discuss or apply any principle limiting maintenance based on marriage duration of 15 years (or any specific long duration); instead, it affirms maintenance rights without reference to time limits tied to marriage length. The query's assertion finds no support or direct refutation in the text specific to 15 years.
Final included findings: None across categories.
JUDGMENT :
J.B.PARDIWALA, J.
1. This appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (for short “the Act, 1984”) is at the instance of the original defendant (husband) and is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Ahmedabad dated 10th January, 2019 in the Family Suit No.257 of 2017 instituted by the respondent herein original plaintiff (wife) for a decree of divorce under the provisions of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939 (for short “the Act, 1939”).
2. The facts, giving rise to this appeal, may be summarized as under;
2.1 For the sake of convenience, the appellant herein shall be referred to as the original defendant and the respondent herein shall be referred to as the original plaintiff.
2.2 The plaintiff got married with the defendant on 13th June, 2009 in accordance with the Muslim rites and customs. In the wedlock, the plaintiff conceived, but unfortunately, as alleged on account of physical cruelty at the end of the defendant and his family members, the plaintiff gave birth to a still born child.
2.3 It appears from the materials on record that the defendant started harassing the plaintiff soon after the marriage.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
