Madhya Pradesh High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“No husband will tolerate that his wife is in undignified or indecent conversation through mobile by way of vulgar chatting.”

Financial independence in alimony
Case BriefsSupreme Court

A sum of Rs. 50 Lakhs has also been awarded to the daughter, in line with the principles of safeguarding the interests of children suffering under distress of such prolonged matrimonial disputes between the parents.

Allahabad High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“The long period of continuous separation of a decade establishes that the matrimonial bond is beyond repair. Marriage between the parties has become a fiction, though supported by a legal tie.”

article 142 of the constitution
Case BriefsSupreme Court

This ruling is significant in the light of the judgment dated 01-05-2023, wherein the Constitution Bench had held that the Supreme Court has the power to dissolve a marriage on the ground of irretrievable breakdown under Article 142(1) of the Constitution of India.

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Delhi High Court: Subramonium Prasad, J., reversed the order of the Family Court which had granted maintenance to the respondent under Section 125

Case BriefsDistrict Court

Family Court No. 3, Pune: M.R. Kale, J., addressed a petition for divorce by mutual consent under Section 28 of the Special

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: The Division Bench of Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and MR Shah, JJ., modifies the maintenance amount being to a son.

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Chhattisgarh High Court: A Division Bench of Prashant Kumar Mishra and N.K. Chandravanshi, JJ., reversed a decree of judicial separation passed by

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Chhattisgarh High Court: The Division Bench of Prashant Kumar Mishra and N.K. Chandravanshi, JJ., while finding error in trial court’s decision held

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Chhattisgarh High Court: Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant, J. sets aside the impugned order and allowed the petition. The facts of the case

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Chhattisgarh High Court: Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant J., allowed the petition and quashed the impugned order. The facts of the case are

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Madras High Court: T. Raja and G. Chandrasekharan, JJ., addressed a matter wherein wife approaches the wife appealed against the family court’s decision

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court: Pushpa V. Ganediwala, J., addressed the following substantial questions of law: Whether it is necessary for the wife to

Case BriefsForeign Courts

South Africa High Court, Kwazulu-Natal Division: Bezuidenhout, J. while adjourning the application sine die granted the applicant leave to amend her papers

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Karnataka High Court: The Division Bench of S.N. Satyanarayana and P.G.M. Patil, JJ. allowed this appeal and remanded the matter back to

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Rajasthan High Court: The Division Bench comprising of Narendra Singh Dhaddha and Mohammad Rafiq, JJ. allowed a decree of divorce which was

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Chhattisgarh High Court: The Division Bench comprising of Prashant Kumar Mishra and Gautam Chourdiya, JJ. allowed an appeal to grant a decree

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Calcutta High Court: Madhumati Mitra, J. dismissed an application filed by the petitioner to quash the order of the Additional Sessions Judge whereby

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Uttaranchal High Court: Lok Pal Singh, J. dismissed a writ petition where mandamus was sought to direct the Principal Judge of Family

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Uttaranchal High Court: A Division bench comprising of Rajiv Sharma and Alok Singh, JJ. dismissed an appeal filed against the judgment of