Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Right to Promotion is Legitimate Expectation; Marriage-Based Transfer Can't Defeat It: Himachal Pradesh High Court
12 Mar 2026
Section 4 Official Secrets Act Presumption and Prima Facie Evidence Bar Bail in Espionage Case: Punjab & Haryana HC
14 Mar 2026
Centre Revokes Wangchuk's NSA Detention Amid SC Challenge
14 Mar 2026
No Interference Allowed in Religious Prayers on Private Premises: Allahabad HC Cites Maranatha Precedent
14 Mar 2026
No Proof of Absolute Ownership by Mizo Chiefs Bars Fundamental Rights Claim Under Article 31: Supreme Court
14 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, DONADI RAMESH
Firoz Karim – Appellant
Versus
Dimple Karim – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Shri Abhishek, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri R.P. Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The present appeal has been filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 against the judgment and order dated 23.02.2016 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Jhansi, in Petition No.410 of 2013 (Firoz Karim Vs. Smt. Dimple Karim and another). By that order, learned court below has dismissed the divorce petition filed by the present appellant under Section 10 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act")
3. Primarily, the divorce petition had been filed by the present appellant on two grounds. First adultery and second desertion had been pleaded. As to the ground of adultery, according to the appellant, respondent no.2 had committed adultery. That pleading was made in the divorce petition. However, the same was not admitted. Rather the allegation of adultery was denied by respondent no.1. Respondent no.2 / adulterer did not appear in the proceeding. As to evidence of adultery, the appellant examined hims
The court emphasized that allegations of adultery and desertion must be substantiated by credible evidence, which the appellant failed to provide.
Divorce – Foundational facts regarding allegation of adultery must be proved.
The appellant must provide credible evidence for claims of cruelty and adultery for a divorce to be granted, as mere allegations without proof do not meet legal standards.
(1) Divorce suit – Divorce petition could not be rejected merely because a part of cause of action was not viable in law if Court otherwise had jurisdiction to entertain the action.
(2) Divorce su....
The Court held that mere separation without proof of animus constitutes insufficient grounds for desertion under Section 13(1)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act.
(1) Deemed Acceptance - It is trite law that if a witness is not subjected to cross examination by the other side, his testimony is deemed to have been accepted.
(2) Rebuttal of averments - In the....
The court held that allegations of adultery, cruelty, and desertion must be substantiated with cogent evidence, and mere claims are insufficient for divorce.
Point of Law : It is not proved that respondent-wife deserted appellant/plaintiff for a period not less than two years immediately preceding the date of presentation of the divorce petition.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article