The realisation that language is at the root of culture, that communities sometimes sacrifice their very existence for survival of their mother tongue and that tolerance and mutual accommodation on the linguistic front are integral to national integration must persuade the court to keep its hands off the delicate strategic policy of the State relating to the people’s language. Indeed, rich diversity of India and the indispensable unity of the nation make it a linguistic imperative that a spirit of generosity to territorial communities, especially minorities without political pull is of the quintessence of our constitutional policy. Continue reading
Hardly a sensitized judge who sees the conspects of circumstances in its totality and rejects the testimony of a rape victim unless there are very strong circumstances militating against its veracity. None we see in this case, and confirmation of the conviction by the courts below must, therefore, be amatter of course. Judicial response to human rights cannot be blunted by legal bigotry. Continue reading
“the first hearing of the suit” can never be earlier than the date fixed for the preliminary examination of the parties (0. X, R. 1) and the settlement of issues (0. XIV, R. 1 (5)). Continue reading
Subjects and Courses of Study for LL.B.
LL.B. I Term: (New Course)
LB 101: Jurisprudence-I (Legal method, Indian Legal System, and Basic Theory of
LB 102: Principles of Contract (General Principles).
LB 103: Law of Torts (Nature, General Principles, General Defenses, specific Torts,
Motor Vehicle Accidents and Consumer Protection Laws).
LB 104: Law of Crimes: Indian Penal Code (Specific offences and General Principles).
LB 105: Family Law-I (Hindu Law of Marriage, Adoption & Maintenance, Minority
and Guardianship, Muslim Law of Marriage, Divorce and Dower &
Acknowledgement of Paternity, wakfs and Endowments. Continue reading
Indian constitution is not the result of freedom struggle nor it has any respect for the freedom struggle. Continue reading
Anti-Suit Injunctions are meant to restrain a party to a suit/proceeding from instituting or prosecuting a case in another court, including a foreign court.
The marriage between Dinesh Singh Thakur-the appellant-husband and Sonal Thakur – respondent-wife was solemnized on 20.02.1995 as per Hindu rites and two children were born out of the said wedlock. The appellant-husband was working in United States of America (USA) at the time of marriage and he took the respondent-wife to USA on Dependent Visa. Both the parties got the citizenship of USA in May, 2003. They obtained “PIO” status (Person of India Origin) in June 2003 and “OCI” status (Overseas Citizens of India) in July 2006. Continue reading
The Wife fled from America with minor daughter and filed a divorce suit in Delhi. Husband filed a Custody proceeding in America and got a custody order.
The first marriage between the parties was performed in New Delhi as per Anand Karaj Ceremony and Hindu Vedic rites on 31st October, 2010 and the petition for dissolution of marriage has been filed in New Delhi. Whereas, the civil marriage ceremony on 19th March, 2011 at Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, USA, was performed to complete the formalities for facilitating the entry of the appellant into the US and to obtain US Permanent Resident status. Before the marriage, the parties entered into a PreNuptial Agreement dated 20th October, 2010 enforceable in accordance with the laws of the State of Illinois, USA. Continue reading
As a divorced woman, if she cannot maintain herself or remains unmarried, the man who was, once, her husband continues to be under a statutory duty and obligation to provide maintenance to her. However since the decree of divorce was passed on the ground of desertion by wife, she would not be entitled to Maintenance for any period prior to the passing of the decree under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Continue reading
Habeas corpus—Custody of minor children—Decree of divorce passed by foreign Court in view of conduct of wife in flowing away to India with children without obtaining any order from foreign Court—Foreign Court also granted custody of children solely to husband—Wife filing petition for custody in India—Decree passed by foreign Court though a relevant factor—Would not override welfare of minor children. Custody of the Children given to wife in India. Continue reading
The spouses had set up their matrimonial home in England where the wife was working as a clerk and the husband as a bus driver. The boy is a British citizen, having been born in England, and he holds a British passport. It cannot be controverted that, in these circumstances, the English Court had jurisdiction to decide the question of his custody. The modern theory of conflict of Laws recognises and, in any event, prefers the jurisdiction of the State which has the most intimate contact with the issues arising in the case. The spouses in this case had made England their home where this boy was born to them. The father cannot deprive the English Court of its jurisdiction to decide upon his custody by removing him to India. Continue reading