The penalty imposed under Order 11, Rule 21 is of high penal nature and should be used only in extreme cases and should no way be imposed unless there is a clear failure to comply with the obligations. It should be applied only in extreme contumacy o..
Before declaring the judgment the court very well explained the provisions under Order 33 before and after the amendment. It referred several cases as well. It finally held that, person refers to one who is capable of filing a suit and Order 33 being..
Before declaring the Judgment the Court very carefully explained the provisions of Section 13B and Section 23(1)(bb) of HMA and the sub-sections under it. The Court also explained the Section 28 of the Special Marriage Act as Section 13B is in pari m..
Before declaring the Judgment the Court carefully explained the term indigent as mentioned under Rule 1 Order 33 of CPC. Apart from the said immovable properties, the petitioners owned 450 grams of gold jewels and properties valued more than Rs.1000/..
The petition was dismissed as there was no merits in the review petition...
The Supreme Court of India rejected the order of High Court and gave sanction to the claim of appellant...
The High Court ultimately held that such an application for eviction was maintainable. Hence the appeal to this Court Allowing the appeal and remitting the case back to the Rent Controller. ..
High Court gave a new judgment setting aside the order passed by the Trial Court considering the claims of the appellant. ..
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal & upheld the decision of HC...
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. The present proceeding was started in 1974. It was held that an application u/s 11 before amendment, 1976 is maintainable even after the death of the other party. ..
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal. The essential ceremonies required for the valid marriage under the custom were not performed for the second marriage. ..
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal & gave ex-parte order in absence of respondent. It set aside the decree of judicial separation as no case can be made for mental cruelty on the basis of mere domestic quarrels. ..
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal & upheld the decision of HC in granting divorce. The facts & circumstances provides that mental cruelty has been caused to the husband due to the actions & behavior of the wife. ..
No particular amount for maintenance can be fixed by the Act as the amount may differ from case to case. The Courts have to fix the amount of maintenance considering all the circumstances of both the parties...
In the judgment of the case – Sunil Rathee & others v. The State of Haryana & Others, delivered on July 23, 2020, the Supreme Court has explained two conditions, based on which the Apex-Court can withdraw a case from a High Court to itself, exercisin..
The Supreme Court allowed & dissolved the marriage between the parties. The court opined that there is an irretrievable breakdown of marriage in this case and there is no possibility for both the parties to live together...
The Supreme Court withdrew the petition pending before HC & dissolved the marriage between the parties...
The petition was dismissed as there was no merits in the review petition...
In a well-balanced, well-reasoned, well-analysed and well-worded judgment, a two Judge Bench of the Principal Bench at Jabalpur of Madhya Pradesh High Court comprising of Justice Sanjay Yadav and Justice Atul Sreedharan in its judgment titled In Re..
It has to be stated right at the outset that in a major and significant development, the Bombay High Court in a recent, remarkable and righteous decision titled “Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited Vs Teleone Consumer Product Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.” in ..
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
