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

2014 Supreme(MP) 445

S.K.GANGELE, S.K.PALO
Rajkumari – Appellant
Versus
Sonu Vishwakarma – Respondent


Advocates:
Sarvesh Sharma for appellant; None for respondent.

JUDGMENT

Palo, J. -- 1. Aggrieved by the Judgment and decree dated 27.9.2007 passed by the Second Additional District Judge(Fast Track Court) Ganjbasoda district Vidisha in Case No.47-A/2006 (HMA), whereby the learned Second Additional District Judge has granted decree of divorce in favour of the husband/ respondent, the appellant/wife has filed this appeal under section 28 Hindu Marriage Act,1955.

2. It is not disputed that marriage between the appellant and respondent was solemnized on 22nd April 2004 at village Basoda by observing Hindu custom. This marriage was held in ‘Samuhik Vivah Sammelan’(A common marriage platform in which number of couples particular community solemnized their marriage.

3. Brief fact transpired before the learned trial Court is that immediately after the marriage on 22.4.2004 the respondent/husband suspected that the appellant/wife is pregnant. The respondent took her to a maternity home Bhopal for her checkup. Whereby it was informed that the appellant/wife is pregnant. Again on 1.6.2004 respondent/ husband got the appellant/ wife examined by a lady doctor in Uma Nursing Home at /village Basoda. Lady doctor informed that the wife/ appellant is ten weeks


























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