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

2009 Supreme(Mad) 3831

K.K.SASIDHARAN
J. Anitha – Appellant
Versus
J. Prakash – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:V. Rangarajan, Advocate.
For the Respondent:K.P. Gopalakrishnan, Advocate.

Judgment :-

These two revision petitions are at the instance of the petitioner in I.A.Nos.2597 of 2006 and 2178 of 2008 on the file of the learned Principal Family Court, Chennai, whereby and whereunder the application in I.A.No.2597 of 2006 filed for the purpose of enhancing the maintenance was allowed in part and the application in I.A.No.2178 of 2008 filed again for enhancing the maintenance was closed.

The Facts:-

2. The proceedings in F.C.O.P.No.1985 of 2002 was preferred by the respondent against the revision petitioner praying for a decree of dissolution of marriage under Section 13(1) (ia) and 13(1)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act.

3. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnised on 5-09-2001. According to the respondent, the petitioner has been suffering from such mental disorder and to such an extent that he cannot reasonably be expected to live with her. The respondent has also detailed the reasons which made him to file the application for divorce, which according to him was the cause of action for initiation of the proceedings.

4. The application was resisted by the revision petitioner by filing counter. It was her consistent case that she was not





































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