Skip to content


G. Pravimala Sundari Bai Vs. Guduri Premaratnam and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectFamily
CourtAndhra Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Case NumberReferred Case No. 173 of 1979
Judge
Reported inAIR1981AP87
ActsDivorce Act, 1869 - Sections 22, 24 and 25
AppellantG. Pravimala Sundari Bai
RespondentGuduri Premaratnam and anr.
Excerpt:
family - divorce - sections 22, 24 and 25 of indian divorce act,1869 - wife filed petition for judicial separation - trial judge granted separation subject to high court's confirmation - held, high court's confirmation not a precondition for delivery of judicial separation and it comes into force from very day it is passed. - - but the learned judge under a misconception that the decree has to be confirmed by the high court just like a decree of dissolution of marriage, has referred the matter to this court......city civil court, hyderabad, who heard the petition, allowed the same and granted a decree of judicial separation as prayed for. but the learned judge under a misconception that the decree has to be confirmed by the high court just like a decree of dissolution of marriage, has referred the matter to this court. hence it has come up before us. 2. it may not be necessary to go into the facts of this case inasmuch as no confirmation of the decree is necessary by this court. there is no provision in the act which lays down that a decree of judicial separation made by a district judge shall be subject to confirmation by the high court. chapter v of the indian divorce act deals with judicial separation. section 24 lays down that in every case of a judicial separation under the act the.....
Judgment:

Jayachandra Reddy, J.

1. The matter arises under the Indian Divorce Act. The wife filed a petition under Section 22 of the Indian Divorce Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') seeking judicial separation from her husband on the ground that her husband was living with another woman, viz., the 2nd Respondent, and that he deserted her (the petitioner) for more than five years. The learned Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, who heard the petition, allowed the same and granted a decree of judicial separation as prayed for. But the learned Judge under a misconception that the decree has to be confirmed by the High Court just like a decree of dissolution of marriage, has referred the matter to this Court. Hence it has come up before us.

2. It may not be necessary to go into the facts of this case inasmuch as no confirmation of the decree is necessary by this Court. There is no provision in the Act which lays down that a decree of judicial separation made by a District Judge shall be subject to confirmation by the High Court. Chapter V of the Indian Divorce Act deals with judicial separation. Section 24 lays down that in every case of a judicial separation under the Act the wife shall, from the date of the sentence, and whilst the separation continues, be considered as unmarried with respect to property of every description which she may acquire, or which may come to or devolve upon her. It can, therefore, be seen that the decree of judicial separation comes into operation from the very date of passing the same. The second proviso to Section 25 further lays down that nothing shall prevent the wife from joining at any time during such separation, in the exercise of any joint power given to herself and her husband. We are only just referring to these provisions to show that the decree of judicial separation comes into force from the very day it is passed and that it does not require further confirmation by the High Court. Therefore, the decree of judicial separation passed by the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, under Section 22 of the Act has come into force from 27th July, 1979 on which it was passed and the same does not require confirmation by this Court, The reference is ordered accordingly.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //