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

1996 Supreme(SC) 2201

G.T.NANAVATI, K.RAMASWAMY, S.B.MAJMUDAR
Rashmi Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Mahesh Kumar Bhada – Respondent


( 1 ) THIS appeal has been placed before this bench pursuant to an order dated 19-4-1995 passed by a two-Judge bench in the following terms:

"a decade has gone by since Pratibha Rani v. Suraj Kumar - a decision by a majority of 2:1 has governed the scene. Having regard to its wider ramifications and its actual working in the last decade, we are of the view that a fresh look to the ratio in that case is necessary. We, therefore, order that this case be placed before a three-Judge bench. "

( 2 ) THIS appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the Allahabad High court dated 19-6-1992 in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 44 of 1992. The admitted facts are that the appellant was married to the respondent on 7/7/1973 at Lucknow according to the Hindu rites and rituals. The parties have three children from the wedlock. It is not in dispute that there was estrangement in the marital relationship between the husband and the wife. It is the case of the appellant that she was treated with cruelty and was driven out of the marital home along with the three children. She was constrained to lay proceedings under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights. The app
















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