Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K.LAKSHMAN, P.SREE SUDHA
V. Anandkumar – Appellant
Versus
M. Viswa Bharathi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. common order details regarding marriage and maintenance. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 10) |
| 2. arguments regarding claims of marriage validity and maintenance. (Para 7 , 8 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. discussion on jurisdiction of family courts and marriage registration. (Para 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 4. legal requirements for marriage validity under hindu marriage act. (Para 25 , 49 , 52) |
| 5. dismissal of appeals with no costs ordered. (Para 54 , 55) |
JUDGMENT :
K. LAKSHMAN, J.
1. Heard Sri A. Suryanarayana, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri K.S. Murthy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent.
2. The lis involved in all the three appeals and parties are one and the same, therefore, they were heard together and decided by way of this common judgment.
3. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the common order and decree dated 16.03.2011 passed in O.S.No.167 of 2002, O.P.No.1246 of 2010 (O.S. No.13 of 1999) and O.P.No.1248 of 2010 (O.P.No.182 of 1998) by the Judge, Additional Family Court, Hyderabad, the appellant/husband preferred these appeals against the respondent/wife and children as follows:
i) The respondent/wife has filed a petition under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
A continuous cohabitation raises a presumption of marriage; the disputing party carries the burden of proof to establish otherwise.
Restitution of conjugal rights – Where marriage itself is not proved, decree for restitution of conjugal rights cannot be sustained.
Restitution of conjugal rights – If photographs are available, they require a non-biased approach for their consideration.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appellant failed to prove her marriage with the respondent and her claim of living together as husband and wife, leading to the dismissal ....
Point of law: Bigamous marriages are illegal as per the provisions of law but they are not immoral hence a financially dependent women cannot be denied maintenance, on the ground of being a second wi....
A presumption of marriage exists based on cohabitation unless disproven, placing the burden of proof on the party denying the marriage status.
The validity of subsequent marriage during the subsistence of a previous marriage under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
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
