Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: hindu marriage act 1955 Court: supreme court of india Page 1 of about 19,504 results (0.208 seconds)

Apr 26 1996 (SC)

Smt. Parayankandiyal Eravath Kanapravan Kalliani Amma and Others Vs. K ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 1996IVAD(SC)333; AIR1996SC1963; 1996(2)BLJR971; II(1996)DMC82SC; JT1996(4)SC656; (1996)2MLJ82(SC); 1996(I)OLR(SC)598; 1996(4)SCALE131; (1996)4SCC76; [1996]Supp2SCR1

..... and prayers by the parties made before the altar of god. mr. k.p. saksena has reproduced the original sanskrit vows in his book 'commentaries on the hindu marriage act, 1955' from the 'vivah padathi' (marriage code according to laugakshi) complied and translated by pt. bindheswar nath razdan shastri, raj vaidya. the translated portion is given below :in the three mantras of ..... in order to decipher this question we have to have a peep into the background.35. before the enactment of the hindu marriage act, 1955 there existed general hindu law, based upon scriptures and shastras, including their exposition by scholars, which regulated marriages amongst hindus, there were different customs and usages prevalent in different parts of the country.36. in the malabar area ..... children born of such marriage would not be entitled to the benefit of statutory legitimacy or inheritance.9. it may be mentioned ..... null and void under section 11 of the hindu marriage act, 1955 and not to any other marriage. his contention further is that a marriage would be null and void under section 11 only if it is performed after the coming into force of the act and, therefore, all other marriages which were performed prior to the hindu marriage act, 1955, would not be covered by section 16 and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 14 1963 (SC)

Lachman Utamchand Kirpalani Vs. Meena Alias Mota

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1964SC40; (1964)66BOMLR297; [1964]4SCR331

..... . 133(1) (c) of the constitution. the appellant, the husband, filed a petition in the city civil court, bombay, under s. 10(1) (a) of the hindu marriage act, 1955 (which we shall hereafter refer to as the act), praying for a decree against the respondent, his wife, for judicial separation on the ground that in terms of that provision she had "deserted" him for ..... the relevant aspects of the law pertaining to the doctrine of desertion. the hindu marriage act, 1955 (act 25 of 1955), hereinafter called the act, codified the law in that regard. the material provisions of the act read thus : . section 10. (1) either party to a marriage, whether solemnized before or after the commencement of this act, may present a petition to the district court praying for a decree for ..... separation if the other spouse has deserted her or him for a continuous period of not less than two years. this provision introdu- ces a revolutionary change in the hindu law of marriage. it is given retrospective effect. a spouse in india except in some states, who never expected any serious consequences of desertion, suddenly found himself or herself on may 18 ..... may 18, 1955. therefore, the only action which the husband could have taken 'linder the law, as it then stood, was to file a suit for restitution of conjugal rights, and this cable could not possibly be a defence against such an action. if she wanted to join him again she could have submitted to the decree. the bombay hindu divorce act, 1947 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 05 2000 (SC)

Lily Thomas, Etc. Etc. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2000(2)ALD(Cri)686; 2000(3)ALLMR(SC)251; 2000(1)ALT(Cri)363; 2001(1)BLJR499; 2000CriLJ2433; II(2000)DMC1SC; JT2000(5)SC617; 2000(4)SCALE176; (2000)6SCC224; 2000(2)LC1113(SC

..... , but apostasy is a ground for divorce under section 13 as also a ground for judicial separation under section 10 of the hindu marriage act. hindu law does not recognised bigamy. as we have seen above, the hindu marriage act, 1955 provides for 'monogamy'. a second marriage, during the life-time of the spouse, would be void under sections 11 and 17, besides being an offence.34. in govt ..... ties unless a decree for divorce on that ground is obtained from the court. till a decree is passed, the marriage subsists. any other marriage, during the subsistence of first marriage would constitute an offence under section 494 read with section 17 of the hindu marriage act, 1955 and the person, in spite of his conversion to some other religion, would be liable to be prosecuted for ..... the . offence of bigamy. it also follows that if the first marriage was solemnized under the hindu marriage act, the 'husband' or the 'wife', by mere conversion to another religion, cannot bring to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 01 2009 (SC)

Anil Kumar JaIn Vs. Maya Jain

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2009AIRSCW5899; AIR2010SC229; 2010(1)ALT29(SC); 2009(4)AWC3635; JT2009(14)SC139; (2009)8MLJ405(SC); 2010(1)MPHT387(SC); (2010)157PLR248; 2009(12)SCALE115; (2009)10SCC415; 2009(9)LC4071(SC)

..... appeal is, therefore, allowed. the impugned judgment and order of the high court is set aside and the petition for grant of mutual divorce under section 13b of the hindu marriage act, 1955, is accepted. there will be a decree of divorce on the basis of the joint petition filed by the parties before the second additional district judge, chhindwara, under section ..... not agreeable to a mutual divorce. in ordinary circumstances, the petitioner's remedy would lie in filing a separate petition before the family court under section 13 of the hindu marriage act, 1955, on the grounds available, but in the present case there are certain admitted facts which attract the provisions of section 13b thereof. one of the grounds available under section ..... second proposition is that although the supreme court can, in exercise of its extraordinary powers under article 142 of the constitution, convert a proceeding under section 13 of the hindu marriage act, 1955, into one under section 13b and pass a decree for mutual divorce, without waiting for the statutory period of six months, none of the other courts can exercise such ..... suit. during the pendency of the transfer petition before this court, the parties settled their disputes, and, although, the petition involved a proceeding under section 13 of the hindu marriage act, 1955, keeping in mind the settlement arrived at between the parties and also the interest of the parties, this court granted a decree of divorce by treating the pending application as .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 18 1964 (SC)

Mahendra Manilal Nanavati Vs. Sushila Mahendra Nanavati

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1965SC364; (1964)66BOMLR681; 1965MhLJ365(SC); [1964]7SCR267

..... petition for divorce instituted by the appellant on april 18, 1956 in the city civil court of bombay against his wife, the respondent under s. 12(1)(d) of the hindu marriage act, 1955. the petition was decreed by the city civil court, but on appeal, the high court dismissed it. 297. certain broad facts which are not in dispute are briefly these : the ..... the bombay high court, arises out of a petition praying for the annulment of the petitioner-appellant's marriage with the respondent, under s. 12 of the hindu marriage act, 1955 (act xxv of 1955), hereinafter called the act, on the ground that the respondent was, at the time of marriage, pregnant by some person other than the petitioner. 2. the facts leading to the proceedings are that the ..... on merits by the respondent, was dismissed by the baroda court on the ground of want of jurisdiction. the hindu marriage act, 1955 came into force on may 18, 1955. under this act, it was competent to a person, though married prior to the commencement of the act, to apply for divorce upon certain grounds including those set out in s. 12(1)(d) within one year ..... ) a.c. 391 should be followed by the courts while dealing with case under s. 7 of the indian divorce act, 1869, section 23(1) of the hindu marriage act, 1955 which deals with the powers of the court in a proceeding under the act also provides that the court shall decree the relief claimed by the petitioner, whether the petition is defended or not, if .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 21 2006 (SC)

Naveen Kohli Vs. Neelu Kohli

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2006SC1675; 2006(2)AWC1057(SC); 2006(5)BomCR240; 2006(2)CTC510; 128(2006)DLT360(SC); I(2006)DMC489SC; (2006)3GLR2182; [2006(3)JCR128(SC)]; JT2006(3)SC491; 2006(4)MhLj242; (2006)4SCC558

..... case, on the consideration of the totality of facts, this court would like to recommend the union of india to seriously consider bringing an amendment in the hindu marriage act, 1955 to incorporate irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a ground for the grant of divorce. a copy of this judgment be sent to the secretary, ministry of law & justice, department of legal affairs ..... the appellant and the respondent are husband and wife. the appellant has filed a petition under the hindu marriage act, 1955 for divorce. the family court after comprehensively dealing with the matter ordered cancellation of marriage between the parties under section 13 of the hindu marriage act which was solemnized on 20.11.1975 and directed the appellant to pay rs. 5 lacs as her ..... ground of cruelty. it may be pertinent to note that, prior to the 1976 amendment in the hindu marriage act, 1955 cruelty was not a ground for claiming divorce under the hindu marriage act. it was only a ground for claiming judicial separation under section 10 of the act. by 1976 amendment, the cruelty was made ground for divorce. the words which have been incorporated ..... in the interest of both the parties.84. consequently, we set aside the impugned judgment of the high court and direct that the marriage between the parties should be dissolved according to the provisions of the hindu marriage act, 1955. in the extra-ordinary facts and circumstances of the case, to resolve the problem in the interest of all concerned, while dissolving .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 13 1981 (SC)

Guda Vijayalakshmi Vs. Guda Ramachandra Sekhara Sastry

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1981SC1143; 1981(1)SCALE794; (1981)2SCC646; [1981]3SCR223; 1981(13)LC695(SC)

..... respondent argues that in view of the provisions contained in section 21, only the provisions contained in the cpc relating to procedure which will regulate the proceedings instituted under the hindu marriage act, 1955 will apply; and as section 25 of the cpc does not appertain to the domain of procedure and confers substantive right, the said section is not applicable and cannot be ..... plenary power on this court could not have been in the contemplation of parliament at the time of enactment of section 21a of the hindu marriage act, 1955. it is, therefore, difficult to accept the contention that section 21a of hindu marriage act excludes the power of transfer conferred upon this court by the present section 25 of c.p.c. in relation to proceedings under that ..... ) has raised before us a preliminary objection that section 25 of the c.p.c. under which the transfer petition has been made is not applicable to proceedings under the hindu marriage act, 1955 and as such this court has no power to transfer the husband's suit from udaipur district court to the district court at eluru. he urged that section 25 of ..... 1979. on the receipt of the notice of the suit, the respondent filed a divorce suit (petition case no. 28 of 1980) against the wife under section 13 of the hindu marriage act, 1955 in the court of the district judge, udaipur {rajasthan). by the instant transfer petition filed under section 25 c.p.c. 1908 the wife is seeking to get the husband .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 20 2002 (SC)

Jinia KeotIn and ors. Vs. Kumar Sitaram Manjhi and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2003(3)AWC2288(SC); 2003(51)BLJR682; (SCSuppl)2003(2)CHN116; I(2003)DMC1SC; JT2002(10)SC571; 2003(1)KLT348(SC); (2003)1SCC730; [2002]SUPP5SCR689; 2003(1)LC215(SC)

..... schedules properties and the children of sahadeo through smt. jinia keotin were held not entitled to any share in the coparcenary property in terms of section 16(3) of the hindu marriage act, 1955, though they may claim t be entitled to their due share in the property of their parents. during the pendency of the said appeal, the sahadeo manjhi died and consequently ..... inheritance even n theancestral coparcenary property. it was also contended by the learned counsel that inasmuch as but fro the hindu marriage act, 1955 there was no prohibition for an hindu to have more than one wife and it is by virtue of the said act such marriages became unlawful or void, once the legislature by amendment of section 16 chosen to legitimatize the children born of ..... with the 8th defendant was void for the reason that his first wife, smt. kamli devi, was alive and the first marriage still subsisting. the second marriage - remarriage, of 1st defendant with the 8th defendant after the coming into force of the hindu marriage act, 1955 cannot be valid. the learned 2nd additional subordinate judge, dumka, passed a preliminary decree on 27.9.1983 in title ..... effects on society, came to be put an end to by the mandate of the parliament in enacting the hindu marriage act, 1955. the legitimate status of the children which depended very much upon the marriage between their parents being valid or void, thus turned on the act of parents over which the innocent child had no hold or control. but for no fault of it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 26 2008 (SC)

Durgesh Sharma Vs. Jayshree

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2008(4)AWC4160(SC); 2008(5)CTC444; II(2008)DMC675SC; 2008(4)KLT169(SC); 2009(1)MhLj66; (2008)8MLJ944(SC); 2008(13)SCALE54; (2008)9SCC648

..... that case, a (wife) filed a suit for maintenance against b (husband) in a competent court in andhra pradesh. on receipt of notice, b filed a divorce petition under the hindu marriage act, 1955 against a in rajasthan court. a filed a transfer petition under section 25 of the code in this court (supreme court) for transfer of b's suit from rajasthan to ..... the code. there are, however, judicial pronouncements by some high courts.60. in priyavari mehta v. priyanath mehta : air1980bom337 , a-wife filed a matrimonial petition under section 13 of the hindu marriage act, 1955 against b-husband in the court of civil judge at mussoorie (dehradun) for divorce on the ground of cruelty. b appeared in response to the summons and filed written statement ..... andhra pradesh.69. this court considered the provisions of sections 24 and 25 of the code prior to and after the amendment act of 1976 and also sections 21 and 21a of the hindu marriage act, 1955 and held that a transfer petition under section 25 of the code would be maintainable irrespective of the provisions of sections 21 and 21a of ..... -wife did not return matrimonial home, the appellant-husband instituted a petition under section 13 of the hindu marriage act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as `the act') on october 27, 2004 in the family court at ujjain which was registered as hma petition no. 164a of 2004 for dissolution of marriage on the grounds of (i) desertion; and (ii) cruelty. the appellant husband has stated in the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 22 2012 (SC)

Devinder Singh Narula Vs. Meenakshi Nangia

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : (2012)8SCC580; JT2012(7)SC519; 2012(7)SCALE473; AIR2012SC2890; 2012AIRSCW4739

..... of the constitution.5. on behalf of both the parties it was urged that since more than 18 months had elapsed since the original petition under section 13 of the hindu marriage act, 1955, have been filed, the said period could be counted towards the cooling period of six months stipulated under section 13-b of the above ..... for another two months.14. we, accordingly, allow the appeal and also convert the pending proceedings under section 12 of the hindu marriage act, 1955, before the additional district judge-01, west delhi, into one under section 13-b of the aforesaid act and by invoking our powers under article 142 of the constitution, we grant a decree of mutual divorce to the parties and ..... . this appeal arises out of an order passed by the additional district judge-01, west delhi, on 13.4.2012 in hma no.204/2012, while entertaining a joint petition filed by the parties under section 13-b of the hindu marriage act, 1955. on such petition being presented, the learned court below posted the matter on 15.10.2012 for the purpose of second ..... .10.2012.12. it is quite clear from the materials on record that although the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 26.3.2011, within 3 months of the marriage the petitioner filed a petition under section 12 of the hindu marriage act, 1955, for a decree of nullity of the marriage. thereafter, they have not been able to live together and lived separately for more .....

Tag this Judgment!


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