Back
R.D. Shukla, J
Guzari Bai V. Shambhu Singh
C.R. No. 917 of 1995 (1); Decided on 10.7.1997. *
(2) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 -- Ss.5 and 24 -- marriage not peiform,2d according to 5.5 -- no interim maintenance can be awarded to wife by way of , Gandharva Vivah".
¼1½ fganw fookg vf/kfu;e] 1955 && /kkjk 24 rFkk 5 && fookg /kkjk 5 ds vuqlkj laiUu ugha && iRuh dks **xa/koZ fookg** ds vk/kkj ij dksbZ varfje Hkj.k&iks"k.k iznku ugha fd;k tk ldrkA
¼2½ fganw fookg vf/kfu;e] 1955 && /kkjk 24 rFkk 5 && fookg /kkjk 5 ds vuqlkj laiUu ugha && iRuh dks **xa/koZ fookg** ds vk/kkj ij dksbZ varfje Hkj.k&iks"k.k iznku ugha fd;k tk ldrkA
This revision is directed against the order dated 1.8.95 passed by 1st Addl. District Judge, Mandsaur, in H.M.A. No. 9/94, whereby the petitioner's application for interim maintainance under S. 24 of the H.M. Act has been rejected.
The petitioner claims to be the married wife of non-petitioner by way of "Gandharva Vivah". Section 5 of Hindu Marriage Act prescribes ceremony of marriage and, therefore, the marriage has to be celebrated as per the provisions of law. There is no provision of 'Gandharva Vivah' under Hindu Marriage Act. In such a situation the petitioner is not a wife under strict terms of law. Under these circumstances she is not entitled to any maintenance u/s. 24 of the H.M. Act.
The next contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that two children have borne out of the relations of petitioner and the non-applicant. The petitioner is free to have recourse in the appropriate forum.
In the facts and circumstances stated above, this Court finds no substance in this revision. It is, therefore, dismissed. Parties shall bear their own costs.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
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
