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

TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN, SUSHIL KUKREJA
Tejinder Singh – Appellant
Versus
Raghubir Kaur – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Mr. Vijay Arora, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Jyotirmay Bhatt, Advocate

JUDGMENT (ORAL)

Sushil Kukreja, J.—The appellant, who was the petitioner before the learned Additional District Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the “learned Court below”) has maintained the instant appeal under Section 19(3) of the Family Court Act, 1984, against the judgment and decree dated 25.09.2020, passed by the learned Court below, in HM Petition No. 76-N/3 of 2015, with a prayer to set-aside the same by allowing the instant petition.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant/petitioner-Tejinder Singh (hereinafter referred to as “the petitioner”) filed a petition before the learned Court below under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short “the Act”) seeking dissolution of marriage from his wife Smt. Raghubir Kaur (respondent herein) by a decree of divorce. The petitioner averred that he and the respondent solemnized marriage on 31.03.2012 at Resham Majri (Doiwala), District Dehradun, Uttrakhand, according to Hindu rites and customs and out of their wedlock a son, Master Simranjeet, was born. The parties lived together as husband and wife, but after some time the behaviour of the respondent changed and she starte

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