Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Checking relevance for Anil Kumar Mahsi VS Union Of India...
Anil Kumar Mahsi VS Union Of India - 1994 0 Supreme(SC) 675 : Under Section 10 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869, a husband may petition for dissolution of marriage on the ground that his wife has been guilty of adultery. A wife may petition for dissolution on the grounds that her husband has: (i) exchanged his profession of Christianity for another religion and married another woman; (ii) committed incestuous adultery; (iii) committed bigamy with adultery; (iv) married another woman with adultery; (v) committed rape, sodomy, or bestiality; (vi) committed adultery coupled with cruelty that would have entitled her to a divorce a mensa et thoro; or (vii) committed adultery coupled with desertion without reasonable excuse for two years or more.Checking relevance for Ashok Hurra VS Rupabipinzaveri: Rupa Ashok Hurra...
Ashok Hurra VS Rupabipinzaveri: Rupa Ashok Hurra - 1997 3 Supreme 35 : The grounds for dissolution of marriage in this case are based on the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage, as evidenced by the fact that the marriage is dead both emotionally and practically, with no chance of revival. The parties had been living separately for over a year, had not cohabited as husband and wife for a period of at least one year, and had mutually agreed to dissolve the marriage under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The wife withdrew her consent after the 18-month period prescribed under Section 13B(2), but the court found this withdrawal to be based on a false pretext. The court further held that the marriage had irretrievably broken down, and that continuation of the relationship was only for name-sake. The court exercised its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution to grant a decree of divorce by mutual consent despite the wife''''s withdrawal of consent, on the condition that she be paid a lump sum of Rs. 10 lakhs and her litigation costs. The court also noted the husband''''s subsequent marriage and child with another woman during the pendency of proceedings, which further demonstrated the impossibility of reconciliation.Checking relevance for Jorden Diengdeh VS S. S. Chopra...
Jorden Diengdeh VS S. S. Chopra - 1985 0 Supreme(SC) 207 : The legal documents outline various grounds for dissolution of marriage under different personal laws in India. Under the Hindu Marriage Act, grounds include: (i) adultery after marriage; (ii) cruelty; (iii) desertion for two or more years; (iv) conversion to another religion; (v) incurable unsound mind; (vi) leprosy or venereal disease; (vii) renunciation of the world; (viii) absence for seven years; (ix) impotence; (x) lack of consent due to force or fraud; (xi) marriage before age 15 with repudiation before 18; (xii) rape, sodomy, or bestiality; (xiii) maintenance order not complied with for a year; (xiv) mutual consent after one year of separation. The Special Marriage Act provides similar grounds including adultery, desertion, cruelty, mental disorder, imprisonment, venereal disease, leprosy, and absence. The Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act includes adultery, cruelty, desertion, imprisonment, impotence, mental illness, and failure to maintain. Under Muslim Law, grounds include disappearance for four years, failure to maintain for two years, imprisonment for seven years, failure to perform marital duties, impotence, insanity, leprosy, venereal disease, child marriage with repudiation, and cruelty. The court also suggests that irretrievable breakdown of marriage and mutual consent should be introduced as grounds for divorce in all cases.Checking relevance for Mt. Noor Bibi VS Pir Bux...
Mt. Noor Bibi VS Pir Bux - Supreme Court (1949) : Under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, a woman married under Muslim law is entitled to obtain a decree for the dissolution of her marriage on the ground that the husband has neglected or failed to provide for her maintenance for a period of two years (Clause (ii) of Section 2). The court held that the wife only needs to prove the husband''''s failure to maintain her for two years, regardless of whether she was legally entitled to claim maintenance under the circumstances. The court emphasized that the principles governing maintenance during marriage are distinct from those governing dissolution, and that the failure to maintain, even due to the wife''''s disobedience, constitutes a valid ground for dissolution under this clause.Checking relevance for Munish Kakkar VS Nidhi Kakkar...
Munish Kakkar VS Nidhi Kakkar - 2019 0 Supreme(SC) 1374 : In India, divorce cannot be granted on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage under statutory law (Hindu Marriage Act, 1955), as the legal system follows the ''''fault theory'''' where no party can take advantage of their own fault. However, the Supreme Court, under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, has the extraordinary power to grant a decree of divorce even in the absence of statutory grounds, including on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage, particularly when there is no consent from the respondent and no willingness of the parties to live together, and all efforts to reconcile have failed. This power is exercised in cases where continuing a completely failed marriage only on paper is deemed futile.
