Back
CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
Ramesh Sinha, C. J., *Sanjay K. Agrawal, Deepak Kumar Tiwari, JJ.
Babulal Yadav v. Sonu Yadav
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conflicting judgments on stridhan return applicability. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. stridhan as separate property; husband's role defined. (Para 4 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. (Para 5 , 6 , 19 , 21) |
| 4. mechanism for return of stridhan via cpc provisions. (Para 14 , 20 , 27) |
| 5. clarity on application jurisdiction for stridhan. (Para 28 , 30) |
1. Finding conflict between the judgments rendered by Division Bench of this Court in FAM No.61/2016 (Smt, Devika Joshi v. Shri Deepak Joshi(2016 SCC OnLine Chh. 2145 : (2016 AIR CC 3198 (CHH)))), decided on 22-7-2016. holding that "independent suit under S.27 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (for short, 'the Act of 1955') would be maintainable for return of stridhan" and another Division Bench of this Court in the matter of Smt. Babita alias Gvatri v. Modprasad alias Pintu Kheersai Patel and others(AIR 2018 Chh. 40) holding that "application for return of stridhan under S.27 of the Act of 1955 is not maintainable", Division Bench of this Court while hearing this F.A.(MAT) No.40/2022 preferred against the judgment and decree dated 23 - 12-2021 passed by the Family Court, Ambikapur in Civil Suit No.216A / 2018, has referred the matter to Hon'ble the Chief
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
