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

2019 Supreme(P&H) 408

RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL
JYOTI – Appellant
Versus
NEERAJ KUMAR SAINI – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Dhiraj Chawla, Advocate

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.

An interesting proposition has come up before this Court for adjudication as to whether an appeal filed under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act') would be maintainable, against the judgment and decree by which decree of divorce has been granted by the trial Court under Section 13-B of the Act, de hors the provisions of Section 96 (3) of the Code of Civil Procedure?

2. In brief, marriage of the parties to the lis was solemnized on 06.07.2014 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies at Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar. They were blessed with a female child namely; Vedanshi. But due to some temperamental differences, both of them had decided to part ways and to obtain decree of divorce by way of mutual consent. Thus, they filed the petition under Section 13-B of the Act before the District Court at Jhajjar. Their first motion statements were recorded on 25.05.2018 followed by the second motion statements recorded on 29.11.2018. It was decided that the husband would pay a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- towards full and final settlement to the wife in lieu of the consent for grant of divorce and the custody of their minor child, Vedanshi, would rem









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