Judgments - Divorce
R. Srinivas Kumar Versus R. Shametha
If both the parties to the marriage agree for separation permanently and/or consent for divorce, in that case, certainly both the parties can move the competent court for a decree of divorce by mutual consent. Only in a case where one of the parties do not agree and give consent, only the the powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India are required to be invoked to do the substantial Justice between the parties, considering the facts and circumstances Full Judgment
Ravinder Kaur Versus Manjeet Singh (Dead) Through Lrs.
As already noticed, the High Court,while taking note of the nature of allegations made has proceeded on the basis that there is irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. Needless to mention that irretrievable breakdown of marriage by itself is not a ground provided under the statute for seeking dissolution of marriage. Hence, merely because certain issues have been raised with regard to the same, even if it be on a misunderstanding in the instant facts, it cannot be considered as inflicting mental Full Judgment
KIRAN DEVI VERSUS KAPIL
RASHMI CHOPRA VERSUS THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR
Mayank Shrivastava Vs Smt. Ritu Shrivastava
NUTAN GAUTAM VERSUS PRAKASH GAUTAM
LAHARI SAKHAMURI VERSUS SOBHAN KODALI
Jitendra Singh Kaurav Vs Smt. Rajkumari Kaurav
Smt. Rakhi Shukla Vs. Manoj Shukla
MR. ANURAG MITTAL Versus MRS. SHAILY MISHRA MITTAL
Referred Cases - (1) LILA GUPTA Vs LAXMI NARAIN & ORS (2) SHIV PRASAD Vs. DURGA PRASAD & ANR Full Judgment
Manju Kumari Singh @ Smt. Manju Singh VERSUS Avinash Kumar Singh
Referred Cases 1. Naveen Kohli v. Neelu Kohli, 2. Sanghamitra Ghosh v. Kajal Kumar Ghosh, Full Judgment
Mrs. Kanika Goel :Versus: State of Delhi through S.H.O. and Anr.
Referred Cases 1. JUSTICE K S PUTTASWAMY (RETD.), AND ANR 2, Surinder Kaur Sandhu Vs. Harbax Singh Sandhu and Anr 3, Aviral Mittal Vs. State 4, Shilpa Aggarwal Vs. Aviral Mittal and Anr. 5, Dr. V. Ravi Chandran Vs. Union of India & Ors. Full Judgment
Smt. Baljeet Kaur Vs. Harjeet Singh
Law laid down - 1- Mandatory period as prescribed in Section 13-B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to 'the Act, 1955) is discretionary in nature and Court can consider if there is no possibility of the parties resuming cohabitation and there are chances of alternative rehabilitation. 2- The Court can view the medium of video conferencing for seeking divorce under Section 13-B of the Act, 1955 and can also permit genuine representation of the parties through close relations such as Full Judgment