CASES Flashcards
(35 cards)
widow gets coparcenary property does FIL have to maintain
her (hindu)
no, as per Animithu v gandhimmal
live in Relationship- children legitimate? maintencance?
tulsa v Dhurgatiya
balusubramanyam v suruttayan- children will be legitimate, and anyway 125 crpc u gotta maintain ur kids
bigamy
lily thomas v uoi - bigamy applicaple to both male and fem
joined religious organisations and retreated from world
sital das v sant ram participate in certain rituals and ceremonies that are required by their religion,- ground for divorce as now sanyasi
assuming dead previous husb and NOT obtained divorce decree, but marrying new one- old husband can question valididty of new marriage due to bigamy
Nirmoo v Nikkaram
rules of cruelty to est divorce- evidence, apprehension, no condoning cruelty, no taking advantage of position
dastane v dastane
cruelty comes in many forms and it is boudnless thus cannot be defined
Ravi kumar v Jumli Devi
maintenance pendente lite
malhotra v malhotra
for adoption if married - require consent from spouse consnet must be in writing or through an affirmative act done voluntarily
Ghisalal v Dhapubai
refusing to take part in the divorce process and compelling the appellant to remain in a dead marriage would both be considered acts of mental cruelty.
Samar ghosh v jaya ghosh- it also conveys no divorce through mutual consent
- adopted child also acquires the caste of adoptive parents
(khazan singh v UOI)
conjugal rights
T sareetha v T venkatta Subbaiah- andhra pradesh HC declared s.9 violative of constitional rights sich as article 19, 14, 21,
and said it takes away bodily autonomy and forces intercourse.
Harvinder Kaur v Harmander Singh- states that it is valid because conjugal rights arent solely based on intercourse and that family law cannot be conjectured w constitional? idk
Saroj Rani v Sudershan Kumar- stated that it is valid because if restitution of conjugal rights judgement is not followed for 1 year it becomes a ground for divorce and any attachment of property is just a sanction to that judgement is merely a financial incentive to resume conjugal rights- if not then 1 yr later divorce anyway
mother is also a natural guardian and no less than father- whoever is deeply concerned with welfare of child, whoever is capable of and available for taking care of the child and is deeply interested in the welfare of the child, and that need not necessarily be the father.
Githa hariharan v RBI
husband died after that wife adopted son but then she also dies 2 weeks later- adoptive son claimed rights in deceased husbands proprty- he can claim
Sawan Ram v Kalawati
)A custody dispute between the father and the maternal grandparents. The mother of the minor had died under suspicious circumstances, and the father was tried under s. 304 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and convicted by the trial court, but acquitted by the appellate court. children chose to live with grandad
ram nath v Dudeja
husb asking for money not cruelty but if it is context of dowry- yes cruelty
Shobha Rani v Madhukar Reddy
wife cruelty to husband cases
Jayachandra v. Aneel Kaur- she was cruel but he condoned by intercourse- so cruelty not grounds. ruled in favour of wife
Anita jain v Rajendra kumar jain- wife accused hus of adultry with sister in law when allegations were false and they had lived in sperate houses for years so it is clear the marriage had an irretrievable breakdown, thus cruel
wife died in sus circumstance and husb charged for 498a- cruelty to wife. maternal uncle took custody q
Joshi v Pradip Joshi
similar to ram nath v dudeja
christian lady did not want to reveal identity of baby dady as it was out of wedlock. applied for natural guardianship, ruled: no need to inform babydaddy we cannot violate right to privacy by forcing her.
ABC v state
can inherit from live in relationships if lived 2gether for considerable amt of time
VIdhyadhari v Sukhrana bai
the court did not give validity to the Chhor Chithhi as a complete decree of divorce.
awarded maintenance
Daga v Daga
husb gotta give maintenance regardless of wifes income to ensure she has the living standard as when they were married q
Neela Rakesh Jain v Rakesh Jeetmal
harrassment for dowryis cruelty in live in relatioship also
Koppisetti Subramanian vs. State of Andhra
the husband had married the first wife and then married the second wife without obtaining a divorce from the first wife. The second wife filed a petition for maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC, and the court granted her maintenance, taking into account the husband’s income, his obligation to maintain both wives, and the financial needs of the second wife.
Suresh Babu v geetha