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

1963 Supreme(P&H) 106

P.C.PANDIT
Harbhajan Singh – Appellant
Versus
Brij Balab Kaur – Respondent


Advocates:
Puran Chand and T.S. Munjral, for Appellant; Chattar Singh, for Respondent.

JUDGMENT :- This is an appeal against the order of the learned District Judge, Jullundur dismissing the petition of Harbhajan Singh, appellant, under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for the annulment of his marriage with Smt. Brij Balab Kaur, respondent.

2. According to the allegations of the petitioner, the parties were married on 12-7-1955 at Jullundur. The negotiations for this marriage took place between the petitioner and his father, Lekh Raj, on the one hand, and the respondents father, Nau Nihal Singh, on the other, in the month of February, 1955, at Jullundur. Nau Nihal Singh assured the petitioner that the respondent was a virgin and her character was unblemished. She was educated and was 20 years of age. Upon this, the petitioner gave his consent for the marriage. The respondent used to live with her father at Meerut. Nau Nihal Singh offered to perform all the ceremonies in connection with the marriage at Jullundur and stated that thereby the petitioner would not be required to go to Meerut. As a result of this undertaking, the petitioner had no opportunity to visit Meerut and ascertain the antecedents of the respondent. Soon














































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