SHALINI PHANSALKAR JOSHI
Adnan Chara – Appellant
Versus
Farhat Adnan – Respondent
With consent of learned counsel for the parties, heard finally at the stage of ‘admission’ itself.
2. Admit.
3. A very short question raised for consideration in this Second Appeal is, whether in a suit filed under Section 2 of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939, the Civil Court was competent to grant the relief of maintenance and the relief in respect of matrimonial property of the spouses, for which other statutory enactments and other forums are available?
4. This Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 06/12/2016 passed by the District Judge-5, Thane, in Civil Appeal No.56 of 2016 which was preferred against the judgment and order dated 11/02/2013 passed by the 9th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Thane, in Special Civil Suit No. 257 of 2011.
5. The said suit was filed by the Respondent-wife, herein, under Section 2 of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred as, “the Act”), seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty. In the plaint itself, she has claimed the return of ‘Meher Amount’, the maintenance for her two minor children and half share in the flat jointly owned by her and the Appellant.
6. The Appellant
Santosh Hazari V/s. Purushottam Tiwari
Gauri Shankar V/s. Rakesh Kumar and Others
Rameshwar Dass Gupta V/s. State of U.P. and Another
Sushilabai Laxminarayan Mudliyar & Others V/s. Nihalchand Waghajibhai Shah & Others
Mohammed Anis Ul Haq Manzul Ul Haq V/s. Asma Anjum Anis Ul Haq
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.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.