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

1988 Supreme(Mad) 432

NATARAJAN
Ranganatham – Appellant
Versus
Shyamala – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:M. N. Padmanabhan, R. S. Venkatachari, Advocates.

Judgment :-

C.R.P. 1324 of 1986 converted into C.M.S.A. No.8 of 1988:- In view of the order passed in C.M.P. 12496 of 1988 this petition is converted into C.M.S.A. and disposed of accordingly. The only substantial question of law that arises in this appeal is whether the permanent alimony can be granted to wife u/S.25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, even though the main petition for annulment of marriage u/S.12 of the Act is dismissed.

2. According to the learned counsel for the appellant Mr. M.N. Padmanabhan that u/S.25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, a permanent alimony can be granted only when on the petition filed by either of the spouses u/Ss.9, 10, 11, 12 or 13 of the Act, a decree is passed and not in cases where the petition is dismissed. According to the learned counsel, only in cases where the marriage relationship comes to an end or altered, a permanent alimony can be granted and not in cases where the relationship of the marriage is subsisting and the remedy of the spouse is to proceed under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 for the relief of maintenance and not under the Hindu Marriage Act. In support of his contention, the learned counsel relied on various decisions r





























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