Judgments on family Law

Validity of Marriage
i) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955- Sections 2,5,7,11,12(1)©- Nullity of
Marriage – Marriage entered into by a Hindu with Christian in a temple and
registered under Section 8 of Hindu Marriage Act- Validity of marriage –
Preamble itself indicates that the act was enacted to codify the law relating
to marriage amongst Hindus- Section 2 of Act reinforces said preposition –
Section 5 of the Act thereafter also makes it clear that a marriage may be
solemnized between any two Hindus if the conditions contained in the said
section were fulfilled – Section 7 of the 1955 Act is to be read along with
section 5 in that a Hindu Marriage, as understood under section 5 – Could be
solemnized according to the ceremonies indicated therein – Marriage
solemnized in accordance with Hindu customs was a nullity and its
registration could not validate the same – Order of High court confirmed.
ii) Hindu marriage Act, 1955 – Section 5 – Expression – “May”-
Discussed.
Citation – Gullipilli Sowria Raj Vs. Bandaru Pavani @ Gullipili
Pavani
Civil Appeal No. 2446/2005

Maintenance
i) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973- Section 125- Muslim
Women’s(Protection of Right on Divorce) Act, 1986- Section 3 –Maintenance
– Divorced Muslim women can not claim maintenance from her former
husband under Section 125, Cr.P.C.- Divorced woman shall be entitled to
reasonable and fair provision and maintenance to be made and paid to her
within iddat period by her former husband.
ii) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 125 and 126 Proviso –
Maintenance – Interim Maintenance – Setting aside ex-parte order for good
cause being shown on an application made within 3 months – No illegality
commited by Court below in granting Interim maintenance under proviso to
section 126, Cr.P.C. – Revisionist has not made payment of amount of fair
provision and maintenance to appellant beyond iddat period, although he
has set up the plea of giving divorce to applicant prior to filling of application
under section 125, Cr.P.C – Amount of interim maintenance to be paid to
wife in pursuance of impugned order may be adjusted in amount of fair
provision and maintenance, etc., which would be payable by revisionist under
1986 Act in case plea of ‘Talak” set up by him in written statement is
accepted – Interference by this Court in impugned order unwarranted.
Citation : Shahid Jamal Ansari Vs. State of U.P & Anr.
Criminal Revision No. 1687/2008
Cruelity With Women
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 125 and 407 – Indian penal Code,
1860 – Section 498 A – Transfer of petition – Maintenance, Cruelty – Wife has
no independent source of Income – She is living with her Parents at Sitamarhi,
after her father retirement- Maintenance Case at Sitamarhi filed giving address
of her parents – Convenience of lady to be case to be seen when she has no
independent source of income – Case filed by wife under section 498 A, IPC at
Patna against her Husband FIR  to be transferred to Sitamarhi where she is living
with her retired father.
Citation :- Dinesh Kumar Chaudhari Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.
Cr. Misc No. 44287/2007Divorce Case
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 13 – Ex-parte Divorce decree – Setting aside
of – No evidence by respondent (husband) nor any reason recorded by court
that petitioner fraudulently, deliberately and intentionally avoided to receive
notice- It would cause great injustice and hardship to wife if husband is allowed
to obtain ex parte decree of divorce behind back of wife – Ex parte decree set
aside.
Citation – Soma Roy V/s Uttam Kumar Ray
W.P. (C) No. 544 / 2008
Permanent Alimony
i) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 25 – Permanent alimony and
Maintenance – Enhancement – Changed circumstances – Claim for enhanced
maintenance can not be rejected merely on gound that there was settlement
between parties under which applicant agreed not to make any further claim for
maintenance – such an interpretation would defeat very object of Section 25 of
Act – While considering application under section 25 (2) of Act only criteria
should be whether there is any change in circumstances justifying enhancement
of circumstances – Agreement defeating right of maintenance provided under a
statute being contrary to Public Policy is not a valid contract and can not
operate as a bar to exercise jurisdiction conferred under section 25(2) of the
Act.
ii) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 25(1), 25(2) – Permanent Alimony
and maintenance - - Scope and ambit provision – discussed. 
Citation : P. Archana @ Atchamamba Vs. Varada Siva Rama Krishna F.C.A
No. 11 / 2008

Print Page