Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR2002Mad6
..... 50,000/-. thus, from the above averments, the respondent wants to prove her case that she has not withdrawn from the society of her husband without reasonable cause. section 32 of the indian divorce act states that the court on being satisfied of the truth of the statement made in the petition, may decree the restitution of conjugal rights when either the husband or ..... wife has without reasonable excuse withdrawn from the society of other. it is manifestly clear from the above section that before ordering for restitution of conjugal rights, it must ..... rs. 50,000/-. thereafter, the respondent complained the matter to the police. the police registered a case under section 498-a, 406 ipc and under sections 4 of the dowry prohibition act. thus, the petitioner continuously gave harassment to the respondent. the cruel acts of the petitioner towards the respondent are unbearable and hence, the respondent is unable to live with the petitioner ..... made unwarranted allegations against the petitioner and complained to the police that the petitioner has been insisting on dowry and caused a prosecution to be launched under the dowry prohibition act against the petitioner and his brother. the petitioner was arrested by the police and he obtained bail from the court. the petitioner issued notice dated 12-8-1988 to .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : I(1991)DMC632
..... is unemployed, is the husband of the respondent. both belong to christian religion. the husband tiled a petition in the district court, krishna at machilipatnam, under section 32 of the indian divorce act (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') for restitution of conjugal rights and the same was dismissed. aggrieved against the said order, the husband filed the present appeal. it is convenient to refer ..... the wife to stay away from the matrimonial home and the husband is not entitled to claim restitution of conjugal bliss under section 32 of the indian divorce act as it is a reasonable excuse for the wife to defend herself as the act committed by the husband amounts to mental cruelty.13. the request if any made by the husband in writing for resumption ..... close relationship with petitioner and the respondent, it can be said that the arrangement as pleaded by him is correct.10. it is relevant to notice the provisions of section 32 of the act which reads as follows :'when either the husband or wife was without reasonable excuse, withdrawn from the society of the other, either wife or husband may apply, by petition ..... the statements made in such petition and that there is no legal ground why the application should not be granted, may decree restitution of conjugal rights accordingly.' 11. section 33 of the act is also relevant in this connection which reads as follows :'nothing shall be pleaded in answer to a petition for restitution of conjugal rights, which would not be ground .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1970Mad434
..... by a christian husband against the order dated 3-2-1965 of the learned district judge, kanyakumari dismissing his petition o. p. no. 41 of 1964 filed under section 32 of the indian divorce act, 1869, for restitution of conjugal rights. the appellant and the respondent abraham nadachi were married according to the christian rites in 5956. the petition itself starts by saying that ..... three judges of the calcutta high court in gomes v. gomes : air1959cal451 . there, the wife filed a petition for dissolution of her marriage with her husband (under section 10 of the indian divorce act, 1869) on the ground that he was guilty of adultery coupled with cruelty, and adultery coupled with desertion, without reasonable excuse, for two years or more. the trial court ..... p.c. the wife will not be guilty of the offence of adultery under section 497, i. p.c. this itself shows that the narrow definition of adultery in section 497, i. p.c. cannot be applied to the interpretation of the terms of section 22 of the indian 'divorce act, 1869. further, the principle underlying the relief of judicial separation on the ground of adultery ..... of the spouse, namely, violation of the marriage bed, makes it immaterial whether the woman with whom the husband has sexual relationship is a married woman or not. the offence under section 497, i. p.c. .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1999SC495; JT1998(7)SC626; 1998(6)SCALE230; 1999(1)LC232(SC)
..... dissolution of her marriage. 33. under the parsi marriage and divorce act, 1936, one of the grounds for divorce set out in section 32 is that the defendant has, since the marriage, infected the plaintiff with venereal disease. 34. under the indian divorce act, 1869, the grounds for dissolution of a marriage have been set out in section 10 which provides that a wife may petition for dissolution ..... if her husband was guilty of incestuous adultery, bigamy with adultery or of rape, sodomy or bestiality. 35. under section ..... 27 of the special marriage act, the party to a marriage has been ..... by either the husband or the wife, be dissolved by a decree of divorce on the ground that the other party (i) xx xx xx xx (v) has been suffering from venereal disease in a communicable form.' 32. so also section 2 of the dissolution of muslim marriage act, 1939 sets out that if the husband is suffering from a virulent venereal .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : I(2002)ACC32; 2002ACJ32; 2001(5)ALD522; 2001(5)ALT154
..... of the special marriage act, 1955 make incurable veneral diseases of either of spouses a ground for divorce. further under sections 269 and 270 of the indian penal code, 1860, a ..... person can be punished for negligent act of spreading infectious diseases.65 ..... under section 10-a or under section 17(4) or 19(2) of the act, there are adequate provisions for medical examination. there are also provisions in segregating rescued women who are suffering from venereal diseases. we may also notice that section 2 of dissolution of muslim marriage act, 1939, section 32 of parsi marriage and divorce act, 1936, section 10 of indian divorce act, 1869, section 13 of hindu marriage act, 1956 and section 27 .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1986P& H196
..... k.p.s. sandhu, j. 1. this is a reference under s. 17 of the divorce act, 1869, for the confirmation of an ex parte decree of divorce granted by the learned district judge, chandigarh, vide his judgment dt. 2nd may 1983, dissolving the marriage between the petitioners (husband) and the respondent.2. sergeant anpian j. presented a ..... thus prayed that since the statutory period as required under the law had passed and there was no hope of the respondent joining him, he be granted a decree of divorce by dissolution of his marriage with the respondent.3. the respondent refused to accept the notice in this petition. on 27th jan., 1983 the district judge ordered ex parte proceedings ..... petition against his wife zilla respondent for the dissolution of the marriage by a decree of divorce. it was averred in the petition that the marriage between the parties was solemnised on 5th april 178, according to the christian rites, that after the marriage the petitioners treated ..... such which gave an indication that she was out to withdraw form the society of the petitioners without any reasonable cause. ultimately, the petitioners filed a petition under s. 32 of the divorce act against the respondent for restitution of conjugal rights and vide judgment dt 14th nov., 1980, the district judge, chandigarh, granted him a decree for restitution of conjugal rights against .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1993Ker57
..... was a muslim. the court found this to be fraud. the principle governs the case on hand, and the marriage is vitiated for purposes under section 19 of the indian divorce act.18. that leads to the question of alimony. the wife claims alimony of rs. 500/- a month. in her application it is stated ..... the court observed (para 4, at p. 1263 of air):'history of all matrimonial legislations will show that conservative attitudes, influence grounds on which separation or divorce, could be granted.'17. the wife in her evidence stated thatshe would not have married the husband, if she knew that he did not belong to an ..... 255 (fb). in v. h. lopez v. e. j. lopez (1886) ilr 12 cal 706 and h. a. lucas v. theodoras lucas (1905) ilr 32 cal 187, it was held that the personal law, which governs roman catholics is the law of the church of rome. the same view was expressed by the high ..... the syrian catholics domiciled in the erstwhile travancore area, are not governed by any statutory enactment in the matter of marriage.11. the indian christian marriage act in force in other parts of the country, has not been extended to this area, in forty two years after the constitution was enacted. there was ..... states that 'christians' mean, persons professing the christian religion. same is the way, the expression is understood in section 3 of the cochin christian civil marriage act. section 2(d) of the indian succession act states:'2.(d) 'indian christian' means a native of india who is, or in good faith claims to be, of .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1963Ker214
1. this is an appeal by the wife against the decree for restitution of conjugal rights passed against her.2. it is clear from the evidence in the case that thee husband, the respondent before us, has been persistent by insisting that his wife should join the chaldean churcn. she is a roman catholic by faith. it is her case that this insistence at times took the form of infliction of physical injury on her. whatever be the truth or otherwise of the allegation regarding the infliction of physical cruelty, we are satisfied that the conduct of the husband in insisting that the wife should change her faith amounted to mental cruelty.3. the progressive tendency of the law has droadend ed the basis of legal cruelty and it is well settled now that it is unnecessary for a wife to establish a mantai offence to resist an action for restitution of conjugal rights. it has been so held in krishna pillai v. neeiakanta final, 1956 ker lt 933 : (air 1957 trav-co. 293).4. we allow this appeal and dismiss the petitionfiled by the husband for restitution of conjugal rignts.we make no order as to costs.Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
..... for a period of two years prior to the date of filing the petition? re-point no.(i): both appellant and respondent belong to christian community and governed by the divorce act, 1869. a combined reading of the pleadings, depositions and material papers contained in voluminous records reveal following incontrovertible facts. marriage between the parties was solemnized on 16.5.1999, but not ..... senior civil judge and cjm, mangalore, allowing the petition filed u/s 10(vii), (ix), (x) of divorce act for dissolution of marriage.) p.s. dinesh kumar, j. 1. these two appeals preferred by the wife in a matrimonial dispute have emanated out of a common judgment and decree ..... .c.no.1/2008 on the file of principal senior civil judge and cjm, mangalore, dismissing the petition filed u/s 32 of indian divorce act for restitution of conjugal rights. mfa no.3501/2011 is filed u/s 55 of indian divorce act, against the judgment and decree dated 20.1.2011 passed in m.c.no.98/2003 on the file of principal ..... the view that the appellant has proved his case for the grant of decree of divorce on the ground of desertion. ? in the case of parveen mehta, the hon'ble supreme court has held as follows:- 19. clause (i-a) of sub-section (1) of section 13 of the act is comprehensive enough to include cases of physical as also mental cruelty. it was .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : AIR2002Delhi307; 95(2002)DLT343; I(2002)DMC273
..... has proved the following documents:-(i) exhibit pw 1/1 is the copy of petition for restitution of conjugal rights under section 32 of the indian divorce act filed by defendant no. 1 against the plaintiff in the family court in ernakulam; (ii) exhibit pw 1/2 to ..... the plaintiff. on on about 18.12.1999, the plaintiff received summons from the family court in ernakulam with petition section 32 of the indian divorce act filed by defendant no. 1 for restitution of conjugal rights. she made inquiries with friends and local acquaintances and has come ..... on 31.12.1999 before the family court in ernakulam coupled with the letter received by the plaintiff through her local advocate in kerala, entitle the plaintiff the relief claimed against defendant no. 1.11. as a consequence, defendant no. 1 is permanently restrained from contracting the second marriage without obtaining divorce ..... divorce. unless and until both consent to part ways, the aggrieved or the victim as the case may be, has to prove the allegations sufficient to dissolve the marriage. marriage cannot be allowed to be rocked on the drop of hat.10. in the light of allegations, withdrawal of the petition under section 32 of the indian marriage act ..... no hope of re-union, is cumbersome and is subjected to strict proof of the grounds available in the statute. if the divorce is made available on constructive creation of ground or is made easily available upon tempos sort of proof, law itself would be .....Tag this Judgment!