Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, M.B. SNEHALATHA, JJ
VRINDA.K.R. – Appellant
Versus
JOBBY. K. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. grounds for divorce must be supported by solid evidence. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. claims of cruelty must be substantiated; mere allegations are insufficient. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 10 , 12) |
| 3. lack of evidence undermines claims of marital cruelty. (Para 6 , 11 , 16) |
| 4. judgment integrity requires proper evidence assessment. (Para 7 , 9) |
| 5. legal actions for protection cannot equate to cruelty. (Para 8 , 13 , 14) |
| 6. assertions without evidence do not hold legal ground. (Para 17) |
Devan Ramachandran , J.
The appellant assails the judgment of the learned Family Court, Kollam in OP( HMA ) No.1131/2016, since by allowing it, it has granted divorce to the respondent against her.
2. Smt.V.Vijitha - learned counsel for the appellant, submitted that the Original Petition in question, namely OP( HMA ) 1131/2016, was filed by the respondent against her client, seeking dissolution of marriage, invoking the provisions of Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act , citing the ground of cruelty; and that it was, in fact, tried by the learned Family Court along with OP No.1318/2017, which had been filed by her client, seeking restitution of conjugal rights by him, under the stipulations of Section
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
