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

2024 Supreme(MP) 126

RAVI MALIMATH, MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
Rahul Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Reetu Sharma – Respondent


Advocates:
R. K. Soni for appellant.

JUDGMENT

1. The instant appeal under section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is directed against the judgment and decree dated 27.1.2010 passed by the Sixth Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Bhind in HMA case No.19 of 2009, whereby an application preferred under section 11 and 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act by the appellant seeking dissolution of marriage either void/voidable has been rejected.

2. Short facts of the case are that the marriage was solemnized between the appellant and the respondent on 2.5.2009 as per the Hindu religious rites and customs at village Urai Road Mihona Tehsil Lahar District Bhind. After the marriage, the respondent-wife lived with the appellant-husband till 8.5.2009. Thereafter, she went to her maternal home and returned back to her matrimonial home on 11.5.2009 and lived there only for 7 days. During that period the respondent-wife had denied the appellant the marital happiness. The respondent-wife told the appellant-husband that she is already married to one Vivek Mishra, therefore, she cannot live with him and she gave the appellant a mobile No. 9753936690 of Vivek Mishra and made the appellant talk with him on the mobile, where Vivek Mis

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