IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA, B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO
Smt. D. Lakshmi @ A.L.N. Phani Kumari – Appellant
Versus
D. Vinod @ Venkata Madhusudana Vinod – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
B.R. Madhusudhan Rao, J.
1. The Appeal arises out of a common order dated 19.09.2024 passed by the Principle District and Sessions Judge Cum Family Court, Medchal-Malkajgiri District at Kushaiguda in F.C.O.P.No.812 of 2014.
2. The appellant is the wife of the respondent/husband. She filed FCOP.No.1717 of 2013 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act, 1955’) for restitution of conjugal rights. The respondent/husband has filed FCOP.No.812 of 2014 for the grant of divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Act, 1955. The Trial Court vide common order dated 19.09.2024 dismissed the FCOP filed by the appellant for restitution of conjugal rights (FCOP.No.1717 of 2013) and allowed the FCOP filed by the respondent/husband for grant of divorce on the ground of cruelty (FCOP.No.812 of 2014).
3. The appellant has not preferred any Appeal against the order in FCOP.No.1717 of 2013, dated 19.09.2024. The appellant is the respondent and the respondent is the petitioner in FCOP.No.812 of 2014. The parties will be herein after referred to as they are arrayed in the Trial Court.
4.1. It is stated in the petition filed by the husband for grant of divorce under Section 13(
Shobha Rani Vs. Madhukar Reddi
Praveen Mehta Vs. Inderjit Mehta
Dr.N.G.Dastane Vs. Mrs. S.Dastane
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.