The case first went to the trial court, where it was held that all the properties are joint family properties of the deceased Ramasami Konar and his disqualified son, (The first defendant), but since he had murdered his father, he is not entitled to
After referring to all the evidences of adultery and cruelty, the husband was declared guilty of adultery and cruelty. The cruelty which entitles her to a judicial separation, even if he was not guilty of adultery. The manner in which the husband had
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal & withheld the decision of HC in not granting divorce. The court observed that the constant nagging & inappropriate behavior of the wife has certainly caused mental agony to the husband which amounts to cruelty.
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. It was observed by the court that the reason for the wife living separately from her husband is justified based on the wrongs done by the husband. Also, the wife is ready to live with him on a reasonable condit
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
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.
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.
In a recent, remarkable and righteous decision delivered just recently on July 21, 2020, the Kalaburagi Bench of the Karnataka High Court in Marenna @ Mareppa v. State in Crl. Petition No. 200315/2020 has very rightly held that a victim under the SC/
The court held that the view expressed by the First Revisional Court that no Muslim woman can maintain a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is unsustainable. Conclusions in the view of a statement alleging utterance of the word ‘Talaq’ thrice is not