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

2009 Supreme(P&H) 1668

VINOD K.SHARMA
Sudershan Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Saroj Bala – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellant:Mr. Amit Jaiswal, Advocate.
For the Respondent No. 1:Mr. Ashok Gupta, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

Vinod K. Sharma, J.:-The husband-appellant by way of this appeal has challenged the judgment and decree dated 17.3.2006, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Ambala, on a petition filed under Section 13 (1)(i), of the Hindu Marriage Act.

2. The facts pleaded in the divorce petition were, that the marriage between the parties was solemnised on 26/27.7.1996 at Chandigarh according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. Both the parties were divorcee. After the marriage, the parties lived together for 2/3 days. However, after 5/6 days of marriage, respondent No. 1 started quarreling with every member of the family and, therefore, they were separated on 2.10.1996.

3. It was pleaded case of the appellant that on 28/29.1.1999, respondent No. 1 left for certain place, but she did not reach the disclosed place and often absented from the house on similar pretexts. The appellant and his family members subsequently came to know that respondent No. 1 was spending her nights with respondent No. 2. It was also the pleaded case, that respondent No. 1 left for satsang on 10.3.1997, and thereafter she never came back and, in fact, went away with mother of respondent No. 2. She was also













































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