Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Allahabad High Court emphasied that the proceedings under Section 27 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 cannot be treated as independent or standalone proceedings to result in a decree.
“The gold given to a bride at the time of marriage is often kept by the husband or his family under the guise of safekeeping of family customs. The woman rarely gets a written record or receipt for such transfers and the woman’s access to her own ornaments can be restricted”.
Supreme Court pointed out that the provisions of the Senior Citizens Act, nowhere specifically provides for drawing proceedings for eviction of persons from any premises owned or belonging to such a senior person.
In the present case, the primary stakeholders are the husband and wife, along with their children or relatives. Given this, the principles established in the Paradip Port Trust case would be more appropriate, and there is no scope for adopting a different view.
“Differences of perception towards life may give rise to different behaviours by individuals. Such a difference of perception and behaviour may be described as cruel by others by observing the behaviour of another. At the same time, such perceptions are neither absolute nor such as may themselves give rise to allegations of cruelty unless observed and proven facts are such as may be recognized in law to be acts of cruelty.”
Read about the significant family law matters heard and decided by the Supreme Court and High Courts in November 2024
“The marriage between the parties becomes a fiction though supported by a legal tie. By refusing to sever that tie, the law in such cases, does not serve the sanctity of marriage; on the contrary, it shows scant regard for the feelings and emotions of the parties”
Madras High Court emphasised that the process of talaq requires strict adherence to established procedures. If the husband asserts that he has divorced his first wife by properly pronouncing talaq three times, but the wife disputes this, it raises the critical question of whether the marriage has been validly dissolved.
The timing, duration, and whether oversight of a child counsellor is required during visitation by a non-custodial parent, is a call that the Court has to take bearing in mind, the best interest of the child.
The Delhi High Court said that in a suit for partition and possession, a relief of declaration sought by way of amendment is impermissible as it would change nature of suit.
The Court rejected husband's challenge to maintenance order stating that ailment of diabetes is manageable due to modern medical advancements.
The phraseology “right to sue survive” used under Order 22 Rule 1 means right to seek relief. The general rule is that cause of action whatsoever existing in favour or against a person at the time of his death survives to or against his legal representatives.
The High Court was bewildered that such a flawed rationale was applied to deny relief to an estranged couple.
Born on 10-02-1962 in Hisar, Justice Surya Kant, has the distinction to be appointed as the youngest Advocate General of Haryana. Before being elevated as a Supreme Court Judge, Justice Surya Kant served as a Judge in the Punjab and Haryana High Court and as Chief Justice of Himanchal Pradesh High Court.
Interviewed by Saman Rahman
A Family Court order allowed a husband to seek mobile tower record details of the petitioner’s mobile number, so that he can prove the existence of illicit relations between the petitioner and his wife. The Karnataka HC sternly quashed the same citing violation of petitioner’s Right to Privacy
“Gendered roles assigned to women and societal expectations mean that women are always pressed upon to take a disproportionate burden of childcare work.”
“When a child takes on to be a kosher member of the adoptive family it is only logical that he takes the surname of the adoptive family and it is thus befuddling to see judicial intervention in such a matter.”
Supreme Court: The bench of AM Khanwilkar and JB Pardiwala*, JJ, in a matter relating to custody of two minor children, has
Madras High Court: G R Swaminathan J. dismissed the petition of an inter-faith couple seeking registration of their self-respect marriage on the