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

1991 Supreme(Mad) 856

VENKATASWAMI, ABDUL HADI
B. K. Tara – Appellant
Versus
B. N. Kannan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant:P. Balambal, Kasturi Rangan, Advocates.
For the Respondent:A.K.S. Abu Thakin, Hemanth Kumar, Advocates.

Judgment :-

This civil miscellaneous appeal by the wife is against the decree for dissolution of marriage granted by the Court below under S. 13(1-A)(ii) of the Hindu Marriage Act in H.M.O.P. No. 474 of 1989 filed by the respondent-husband in the court below, viz., the Family Court, Madras. No doubt, the grounds of cruelty and desertion by the wife were also alleged in the said original petition. But, decree has been granted only on the the ground alleged under the abovesaid S. 13(1-A)(ii) of the abovesaid Act, viz., that there has been no restitution of conjugal rights between the said parties to the marriage ever since 16.6.1987, when the decree for restitution of conjugal rights was given in R.C. No. 205 of 1985 filed by the petitioner-wife in the Family Court, Bangalore till the date when the abovesaid H.M.O.P. No. 474 of 1989 was filed, viz., 16.5.1989. The learned Judge of the Family Court, Madras found in his judgment that admittedly, there was no restitution of conjugal rights between the abovesaid spouses after the passing of the abovesaid decree for restitution of conjugal rights on 16.5.1987. As per the abovesaid provision in S. 13(1-A)(ii) of the abovesaid Act, if there








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