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

2022 Supreme(MP) 316

VIVEK RUSIA, AMAR NATH KESHARWANI
Dilipraj – Appellant
Versus
Rekha – Respondent


Advocates:
Ajay Kumar Kanthed for appellant; Vishal Lashkari for respondent.

JUDGMENT

1. Appellant-Husband has filed F.A. No. 1273/2014 under section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act against the judgment and decree dated 16.9.2014 whereby the Family Court, Ratlam has dismissed a petition filed under section 13(1)(1-a) (1-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act.

Appellant-Husband has filed F.A. No. 352/2020 under section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act against the judgment and decree dated 8.1.2020 whereby the Family Court, Ratlam has allowed a petition filed by the respondent /wife under section 25(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act.

The common facts of both appeals are as under:

1. The marriage of the appellant/husband and respondent/wife was solemnized at Mandsaur under the Hindu customs and rituals on 28.4.1990. According to the appellant/husband, after one year of the marriage, the respondent/wife left his house on 31.5.1991 thereafter he made various efforts to bring her back but she did not return to his house. The appellant filed a First application for dissolution of marriage before the Civil Court on 23.6.1992 which was registered as HMA No. 58-A/1992. Simultaneously, the respondent/wife has also filed an application under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA No. 45

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