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

2024 Supreme(Ker) 1240

.xxxxx – Appellant
Versus
...... – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : ADV S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI
For the Respondent: L.MOHANAN, LIGEY ANTONY, SRI L MOHANAN

JUDGMENT :

M.B.Snehalatha, J

Can an allegation of ‘adultery’ or even when so established, porpoise a claim for compensation is what is projected for our consideration in this appeal.

2. Appellants are respondent Nos.1 and 2 in O.P. No.1574/2014 on the file of the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram.

The said O.P was filed by the husband of the 1st appellant seeking compensation, return of gold ornaments and money from respondents 1 to 5 in the O.P. By the impugned judgment and decree, the learned Family Court decreed the Original Petition in part against respondent Nos.1 and 2 in the Original Petition/appellants herein, directing them to pay compensation of Rs.4 Lakhs to the respondents. His claim for return of gold and cash was disallowed. Aggrieved by that part of decree, granting compensation, respondents 1 & 2 in the O.P have come in appeal.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to by their rank in the original petition.

4. The marriage of the petitioner and the 1st respondent was solemnized on 19.11.2006. During the subsistence of marriage, 1st respondent developed an illicit relationship with the 2nd respondent and on 31.7.2012 she eloped with him taking all th

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