“In fact, DNA test is intended to rebut the `conclusive proof’ provided under Section 112 of the Evidence Act.”
Delhi High Court mentioned that children born from the wedlock will be free to pursue their legal rights in accordance with the law. The parties have entered a settlement only regarding their rights and titles leaving open the the rights, titles, and interests of the children to pursue their legal remedies as per law.
The Jharkhand High Court reiterated the object of Section 498-A of IPC to punish cruelty by husband and his relatives.
The Court was considering a case where a wife had set herself ablaze after having telephonic conversation with her husband who refused to come back and live with her and asked her to go from where she had come.
Delhi High Court observed that an inadequately drafted agreement will be one that fails to include essential elements such as the name of all the relevant parties, the terms outlining the conditions of settlement, and the consequences in the event of non-compliance or breach.
Uttaranchal High Court: While dismissing the instant appeal against the order dated 25-08-2022 passed by Family Court whereby the wife’s
Supreme Court: In a complex case where both the parties claimed to be disabled to get the matrimonial case transferred to the
Punjab & Haryana High Court: Suvir Sehgal, J. while dismissing the petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code
Allahabad High Court: The Division Bench of Kaushal Jayendra Thaker and Ajai Tyagi, JJ. dismissed a writ petition with costs which was
by Bhavna Mehrotra†
Delhi High Court: Expressing that the Family Court’s decision was based on optimism and hope rather than the actual factual matrix of
Kerala High Court: In an interesting case the Division Bench of A.Muhamed Mustaque and C.R. Sophy Thomas, JJ., held that not taking
Delhi High Court: While addressing a matrimonial dispute, Division bench of Vipin Sanghi and Jasmeet Singh, JJ., held that, In cases where
Bombay High Court: The Division Bench of S.S. Shinde and Abhay Ahuja, JJ., reiterated the observation of Supreme Court in Gian Singh
Allahabad High Court: The Division Bench of Dr Kaushal Jayendra Thaker and Ajit Singh, JJ., while setting aside a decree of divorce
Kerala High Court: The Division Bench of A. Muhamed Mustaque and Kauser Edappagath, JJ., held that to get a decree of divorce
Bombay High Court: The Division Bench of A.S. Chandurkar and N.B. Surawanshi, JJ., upheld the decision of the family court. Present appeal
Bombay High Court: Revati Mohite Dere, J., while addressing a very significant issue of assault, expressed that: “There is imbalance of gender
Delhi High Court: The Division Bench of Vipin Sanghi and Rekha Palli, JJ., upheld the Family Court’s decision and directed the parties
Madras High Court: J. Nisha Banu, J., while addressing a revision petition directed the Family Court to waive off the cooling-off period