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

1988 Supreme(Ker) 426

THOMAS
ANIRUDHAN – Appellant
Versus
PRASANNA KUMARI – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. A husband and wife sought for a decree of divorce dissolving their marriage as per the provisions of S.13 B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act'). Both of them together filed a petition on 16-7-1986 on the ground that they have been living separately for more than one year and that they have not been able to live together and further that they have mutually agreed to have their, marriage dissolved.

The court below posted the petition to 24-7-1987 (skipping the period of six months which is envisaged in the Section). On that day, the husband was present in court but the wife was absent. Hence the lower court dismissed the petition for default. Later, an interlocutory application was filed by the husband praying for restoration of the petition. Learned Sub Judge dismissed the interlocutory application by the impugned order. This Civil Revision is at the instance of the husband.

2. According to the learned Sub Judge, S.13 B of the Act makes it clear that no court shall conduct such enquiry before the expiry of six months from the date of presentation of the petition, and it further provides that such enquiry shall be made not later than eighteen months. 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