A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
SETHI P. V. S/O. PADMANABHAN, 'LAKSHMI NIVA', KIZHUNNA, THOTTADA – Appellant
Versus
. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Kauser Edappagath, J.
A joint petition filed by the estranged couple for divorce by mutual consent u/s 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'HMA') before the Family Court, Thalasserry was not entertained citing reason that the husband was represented through his power of attorney holder.
2. The petitioners got married on 8/5/2011. A male child was born to them in the year 2013. But, their marital bliss did not last long. Marital dispute arose and the relationship strained resulting in institution of various legal proceedings before the Family Court and Magistrate Court from 2014 onwards. Later on in 2020, at the instance of the well wishers, mediation took place and the entire dispute was settled and an agreement was executed by the petitioners on 11/1/2020. Having realised that they cannot pull along any longer, the petitioners took a decision to separate. As per the terms of the said agreement, the petitioners decided, inter alia, to file a joint petition for divorce by mutual consent before the Family Court. Accordingly, the petitioners jointly filed a petition for divorce by mutual consent u/s 13B of the HMA before the court below. At the time of the instituti
Puthiyapurayil Abdul Salam v. P.P.Mariyumma and Others
State of Maharashtra v. Dr.Praful B.Desai (2003) 4 SCC 601
Navdeep Kaur v. Maninder Singh Ahluwalia
Kunhi Purayil Mukundan Naveen v. Anjalika Dinesh
Janki Vashdeo Bhojwani v. Indusind Bank Ltd
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.