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

2016 Supreme(Mad) 369

S.VIMALA
A. Raja Sundari – Appellant
Versus
Suresh Kumar – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr.J.James
For the Respondent: Mr.P.R.Thiruneelakandan

ORDER :

“For want of a nail, the shoe was lost

For want of a shoe, the horse was lost

For want of a horse, the rider was lost

For want of a rider, the message was lost

For want of a message, the battle was lost

For want of a battle, the kingdom was lost and all for the want of a horseshoe nail”

- Benjamin Franklin

1.1. Here is a case, where, for want of care, kingdom of matrimony is lost for the revision petitioner.

2. The following issues have been raised by the revision petitioner in this case:-

1. When a marriage is dissolved by a decree of divorce and when the time for preferring the appeal is over, whether it shall be lawful for either party to marry again thereafter, as contemplated under Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act?

2. When the husband who obtained the decree for divorce chooses to marry after the appeal time is over, and thereby exercised his right under Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act, whether that right can be taken away, when there is inordinate and shocking delay in prosecuting the application to set aside the exparte decree, filed by the wife?

3. When the remarri























































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