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

1961 Supreme(MP) 116

P.V.DIXIT, K.L.PANDEY
ALOPBAI, RAMPHAL – Appellant
Versus
RAMPHAL KUNJILAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.H.SAFI, A.P.SEN, R.P.Verma

DIXIT, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS is a Letters Patent appeal from a decision of Tare J. upholding the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge, Narsimhapur, giving to the respondent Ramphal a decree for restitution of conjugal rights.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff's case was that he was married to the appellant Alopbai on 13th march 1950; that after the consummation of marriage the tried to bring the appellant (No. 1) to his house but respondents Nos. 2 and 3 and appellant No. 2, who were close relatives of Alopbai and with whom she was staying, did not allow alophai to come and live with him; that on 24th May 1956 while Alopbai was on her way to the house of Todalsingh (appellant No. 2) he (the plaintiff) met her and persuaded her to come and live with him; that accordingly she came to his house and lived with him for 26, days; that thereafter Todalsingh (appellant no. 2) and gomitibai (respondent No. 2), her mother, took her away from his house after instituting criminal proceedings; and that since then they were preventing Alopbai from coming to his house. Alopbai (appellant No. 1) resisted the suit by pleading that the marriage had not been consummated and that the plaintiff had ill-tr









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