
Long co-habiting couple’s child cannot be disentitled from family property in absence of proof against presumption of marriage: Supreme Court
“Law leans in favour of legitimacy and frowns upon the bastardy.”
“Law leans in favour of legitimacy and frowns upon the bastardy.”
Bombay High Court: The Division Bench of Sunil B. Shukre and G.A. Sanap, JJ. allowed an application quashing an FIR registered for
Kerala High Court: A Division Bench of K Vinod Chandra and C Vijayachandran, JJ. dismissed the petition and rejected the relief sought
Karnataka High Court: M. Nagaprasanna, J. allowed the petition in part and remarked the protagonists in the quadrangle to resolve the issue
Madhya Pradesh High Court: Vivek Rusia, J. decided on a petition which was filed seeking police protection. The facts of the case
Himachal Pradesh High Court: Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J. remarked “there has been no matrimonial relationship between the parties for the last nearly
Chhattisgarh High Court: In a matter pertaining to mental cruelty, the Division Bench of Goutam Bhaduri and N.K. Chandravanshi, JJ., expressed that,
Karnataka High Court: M Nagaprasanna, J., dismissed the petition and refused to grant prayer as the case is at a pre matured
Rajasthan High Court: Dinesh Mehta, J., issues notice and directs police to neither harass nor arrest the petitioner boy. The facts of
Rajasthan High Court: A Division bench of Manindra Mohan Srivastava, CJ. and Madan Gopal Vyas J. allowed the application and granted bail
Punjab and Haryana High Court: Raj Mohan Singh, J., contemplated the present petition and ruled that a short duration of marriage is
Supreme Court: In a case where the husband had disputed paternity of child on suspicion, though the Division Bench comprising of Indira
Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Thane: Noting the fact that a man suppressed the material fact of his private life before marriage
Supreme Court: The Division Bench of L. Nageswara Rao and B.R. Gavai*, JJ., upheld the impugned judgment of the High Court wherein
Karnataka High Court: M Nagaprasanna J. allowed the petition and quashed the impugned order and remitted the matter back to Sessions Judge
Punjab and Haryana High Court: Rajbir Sehrawat, J., allowed the instant revision petition, filed against the order of Family Court, where the
Karnataka High Court: M. Nagaprasanna, J. allowed the criminal petition and quashed both the orders by the Magistrate and the Sessions Judge.
Delhi High Court: Expressing that the Family Court’s decision was based on optimism and hope rather than the actual factual matrix of
Supreme Court: In a habeas corpus case the Division Bench Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka*, JJ., held that in a case
Kerala High Court: In an interesting case the Division Bench of A.Muhamed Mustaque and C.R. Sophy Thomas, JJ., held that not taking