Month: July 2018

Javed Niaz Beg and another  Versus  Union of India and another [ ALL SC 1980 April]

The integrity of India is a supreme, value. The languages of India are dearest to the people who speak them. It is notorious that the North Eastern States Union Territories of Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Nagaland have handicaps in the matter of language.

Advertisements

What is Anti-Suit Injunction and when shall it not to be granted?

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. Simply put, an anti-suit injunction is a judicial order restraining one party from prosecuting a case in another court outside its jurisdiction. The principles governing grant of injunction are common to that of granting anti-suit injunction. The cases of injunction are basically governed by the doctrine of equity.

Smt. Surinder Kaur Sandhu Versus Harbax Singh Sandhu and another [All SC 1984 APRIL]

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.

Whether it is obligatory for Family Court in the first instance to a settlement between the parties of Divorce Suit?

Section 23 of the Hindu Marriage Act mandates the Court before granting decree for divorce, whether defended or not to satisfy itself (1) if the grounds for claiming relief exist and the petitioner is not taking advantage of his or her own wrong or disability for the purpose of such relief, and (2) the petitioner has not in any manner been accessory to or connived at or condoned the act or acts complained of, or where the ground of the petition is cruelty the petitioner has not in any manner condoned the cruelty. A duty is also caste on the Court in the first instance, in every case where it is possible so to do consistently with the nature and circumstances of the case, to make every endeavour to bring about a reconciliation between the parties

Law of Divorce explained by Supreme Court

the right to sue would also survive even if the other spouse dies pending such appeal or application under Order IX, Rule 13, C.P.C. In either case proceedings can be continued against the legal heirs of the deceased spouse who may be interested in supporting the decree of divorce passed against the aggrieved spouse.

What is the kind of mental cruelty that is required to be established to get divorce?

The question arises what kind of cruel treatment does clause 13(ia) contemplate? In particular, what is the kind of mental cruelty that is required to be established’? While answering these questions, it must be kept in mind that the cruelty mentioned in clause (ia) is a ground now for divorce as well as for judicial separation u/S. 10. Another circumstance to be kept in mind is that even where the marriage has irretrievably broken down, the Act, even after the 1976 (Amendment) Act, does not permit dissolution of marriage on that ground.

What will happen if one consenting party withdraw consent before passing a decree in mutual Consent Divorce Suit?

the Court cannot pass a decree of divorce by mutual consent if the Court is held to have the power to make a decree solely based on the initial petition, it negates the whole idea of mutuality and consent for divorce. Mutual consent to the divorce is a sine qua non for passing a decree for divorce under Section 13-B. Mutual consent should continue till the divorce decree is passed. It is a positive requirement for the Court to pass a decree of divorce. “The consent must continue to decree nisi and case is heard.

Muslim Personal Law Board posed to defeat the right to maintenance of Muslim women in Shah Bano Begum case

Dr. Tahir Mahmood in his book ‘Muslim Personal Law’ (1977 Edition, pages 200-202), has made a powerful plea for framing a uniform Civil Code for all citizens of India. He says .:

“In pursuance of the goal of secularism, the State must stop administering religion-based personal laws”. He wants the lead to come from the majority community but, we should have thought that, lead or no lead, the State must act. It would be useful to quote the appeal made by the author to the Muslim community:

“Instead of wasting their energies in exerting theological and political pressure in order to secure an “immunity” for their traditional personal law from the State’s legislative jurisdiction, the Muslims will do well to begin exploring and demonstrating how the true Islamic laws,, purged of their time-worn and anachronistic interpretations, can enrich the common civil code of India.”