Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian divorce act 1869 Page 1 of about 36,456 results (0.276 seconds)

Aug 25 2000 (HC)

Maria Sera Pinto Vs. Milton Dias

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2001(1)BomCR585; (2001)1BOMLR56; I(2002)DMC554; 2000(4)MhLj633

..... was tried and a decree nisi was made on 10th march, 2000. this decree nisi is required to be confirmed under section 16 of the indian divorce act within a period of six months therefrom.3. the indian divorce act, 1869 is applicable where both parties are christians. section 10 enables either party to present a petition for dissolution of the marriage on the grounds mentioned therein ..... have resolved that issue also. the problem arises only in the case of matrimonial jurisdiction exercised by this court under the provisions of the indian divorce act, 1869. as we have already pointed out, dissolution of a marriage under the indian divorce act is a two step procedure - first, there is a decree nisi and, second, a decree nisi is either made absolute by the high ..... on which date kanak mehta's was decided till 5.5.2000 when romila's case was decided) this court continued to exercise jurisdiction in matrimonial cases arising under the indian divorce act, 1869. a number of petitions were tried and decrees nisi for dissolution were made. while these were pending confirmation by the high court, the judgment of the full bench in ..... far as we are concerned, the situation is the converse. it is also not so simple for historical reasons which we have already indicated. none of the proceedings under the indian divorce act, 1869 which were pending before this court was legally held transferable to the family court for a period of nine years from 1991 (kanak mehta) to 2000 (romila). thus, though .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 2002 (HC)

Asha Gomes Vs. Arthur Gomes

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2002(2)ALLMR687; 2002(3)BomCR485; I(2002)DMC794

..... that the same is in fact contrary to the record.7. the petition, which was filed before the family court invoked section 10 of the indian divorce act, 1869. the said section reads as follows :'10. when husband may petition for dissolution.- any husband may present a petition to the district court or ..... had remained absent though served in the family court also. the appellant herein had filed the above referred matrimonial petition, seeking divorce under the provisions of section 10 of the indian divorce act, 1869 on the ground of cruelty, as interpreted by the full bench of this court in pragati varghese v. cyril george varghese ..... 10. for the sake of record, we would like to point out that the above referring section 10 of the indian divorce act, 1869 has been since amended by the parliament by act no. 51 of 2001 and has now a much more humane provision in section 10(l)(x) when it comes ..... the reasons stated above, in our opinion, she has made out a case under section 10 of the indian divorce act, 1869 as interpreted in pragati varghese (supra). she is, therefore, entitled to a decree of divorce. we, therefore, allow this appeal, set-aside the order passed by the learned family court and allow ..... force from 24.9.2001. the said provision reads as follows :'10(1) any marriage solemnized whether before or after the commencement of the indian divorce (amendment) act, 2001 may, on a petition presented to the district court either by the husband or the wife, be dissolved on the ground that since .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 31 2005 (HC)

Kallu Daniel Vs. G.D. Hemalatha

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : II(2005)DMC264; ILR2005KAR2708; 2006(3)KarLJ132

..... .1. the present appeal is filed against the order of the addl. civil judge (sr. dn.), hubli, returning the petition of the appellant, seeking a decree of divorce filed under section 12 of the indian divorce act, 1869, to present it before the proper court.2. the respondent has been served, she remains unrepresented. the only question to be considered in this appeal is;'whether ..... the addl. civil judge (sr. dn.) hubli, did not have jurisdiction to entertain the petition seeking divorce under the divorce act, 1869?'the reasoning of the court in returning the petition is ..... of a district court or district judge on all the officers presiding over the civil judge's courts in the state under the following acts viz., (1) the divorce act, 1869, (2) the lunacy act, 1912 and; (3) the special marriage act, 1954. this position of law has been stated in a full bench decision of this court in the case of chandramohan kumar v. mrs ..... did not have jurisdiction to entertain the petition.3. firstly, the reasoning that the petition ought to have been filed under section 10 and not under section 12 of the divorce act, 1869, need not detain me for long. even if the petition had been preferred under a wrong provision of law, it was incumbent upon the court to look at the relief .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 17 1989 (HC)

Joykutty Mathew Vs. Valsamma Kuruvilla

Court : Kerala

Reported in : AIR1990Ker262; I(1991)DMC479

..... the judgment in o.p. (div.) no. 13 of 1984 dismissing his petition for a declaration that the marriage is a nullity and void under the indian divorce act, 1869. the o. p. was filed on 10-11-1984 and was dismissed on 6-7-1987. the main grounds on which the relief is sought are that ..... that the discretion is vested in the court and the word used in the two sections is may and not shall. while section 19 of the indian divorce act contemplates positive proof of the fact that a party should be a lunatic or idiot so as to give a decree for nullity of marriage, section ..... was impotent at the time of the marriage and whether she continued to be so at the time of institution of the petition under section 18 of the indian divorce act; and, (3) whether any fraud was played on the petitioner-husband for obtaining his consent for the marriage. 9. point no. 3: a perusal ..... sake of argument that she had some psychological problem occasionally even then it is not sufficient for court to dissolve the marriage. section 19 of the indian divorce act contemplates that it must be positively proved that the wife is a lunatic or idiot at the time of the marriage, there is absolutely no evidence ..... has no dependents, while the husband has to maintain his aged parents. the learned district judge did not go into the ingredients of section 36 of the indian divorce act, under which the petition was filed. it is the claim of the appellant-petitioner (wife) that while she is getting a salary of rs. 879/- per .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 20 1967 (HC)

Ajitrai Shivprasad Mehta Vs. Bai Vasumati

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : AIR1969Guj48; (1969)GLR253

..... nature and consequences of his marriage and was not an 'idiot' within the meaning of section 19(3) of the indian divorce act, 1869. the division bench held that even though the term 'idiot' had not been defined in the divorce act, 1869, or in any other indian act, but undoubtedly idiocy was a form of congenital insanity, due to the absence of development of the mental faculties and ..... c. j. and mukherjea j. had to consider the difference between medical and legal definitions of insanity in the context of a similar legislation viz., section 19(3) of the indian divorce act, 1869, which provided for a decree of nullity of marriage on the ground of the other spouse being 'an idiot or a lunatic'. it was found that the person concerned in ..... intelligence from very childhood. it was also held that the only standard and test of insanity laid down by the law was, according to section 84 of the indian penal code, whether the ..... mens rea was a necessary ingredient of the offence, but they would notbe appropriate while considering the unsoundness of mind as a ground of divorce. mr. vakil also pointed out that under section 12 of the indian contract act, the expression 'unsoundness of mind' was used in the context of consent being given for entering into a valid contract where a person must .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 07 1978 (HC)

Dinesh Gijubhai Mehta Vs. Usha Dinesh Mehta

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1979Bom173; (1978)80BOMLR298; 1979MhLJ367

..... high court in, this case. reliance by the learned trial judge on 'l/5th net income rule' as conceived in section 36 of the indian divorce act, 1869 indicates his failure to apply his mind to the requirements of the 1955 act and may have been construed as a failure to exercise its jurisdiction by the court. the contention of mr. kapasi, therefore, shall have ..... to have been based on the rulings cited by him. the learned judges in those cases have, no doubt, relied on the corresponding provision of section 36 of the indian divorce act of 1869, the proviso of which disentitles the wife from claiming interim alimony in excess of the l/5th of the net income of the husband. in the absence of any indication ..... /5th, even when her needs, and capacity of the husband, warrant awarding larger amount. this amounts almost to be a rule of the thumb. such a provision in the act of 1869, may have been based on the then notions and concepts, as to a woman's status and position in the society and her claims against the husband. the provisions of ..... in this behalf in the hindu marriage act, 1955, the learned judges thought it proper to rely on this as a guiding factor. we are unable to trace any rational basis .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 13 2001 (HC)

Reeta Bharat Arora Vs. Bharat Yasodanandan Arora @ Dhingra and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2001(3)ALLMR649

..... cannot be said to be the spouses within the meaning of cl. (i), sub-section (1) of section 5.....'.the supreme court also examined section 57 of the indian divorce act, 1869 which provides for divorce professing christian religion, which has identical provision and which has been consistently interpreted to mean that a marriage contracted during the period prescribed in the fifth paragraph of section ..... the marriage would be void. while commenting on section 57 of the indian divorce act, 1869, the supreme court stated as follows :'..... but a mere glance at section 15 of the act (hindu marriage act, 1955) and section 57 of the indian divorce act, would clearly show that the provisions are not in pari materia. under the indian divorce act a decree nisi has to be passed and unless confirmed by high ..... be computed from the date of decree of the court of first instance which means that a decree of divorce is made by the court of first instance while under section 57 of the indian divorce act the period of six months is to be computed from the date of an order of the high court confirming the decree for ..... court it is not effective and in the proceedings for confirmation, the decree nisi can be questioned. no such requirement is to be found under the act. further, under section 15 the period of one year is to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 10 2003 (HC)

Mini Mathew Vs. Thomas Mathew

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2003IVAD(Delhi)370; 104(2003)DLT760; II(2003)DMC33; 2003(68)DRJ481

..... j.d. kapoor, j. 1. this is a petition by the wife under section 10 of the indian divorce act, 1869 (substituted by act 51 of 2001) seeking dissolution of marriage onthe ground of cruelty.2. put briefly the facts pleaded by the wife ..... be cruel to an individual under one set of circumstances may be extreme cruelty under another set of circumstances.' 13. however, for the purpose of indian law of which indian divorce act is also a part, the supreme court has in dr. n.g. dastane v. mrs. s. dastane, : [1975]3scr967 while dealing with ..... her ignorance. time and again the respondent requested the petitioner to live with him but she always refused to go with him and insisted for divorce. it is alleged that the respondent has also been nursing suspicion against petitioner's character and according to him her conduct and character brought ..... page 206. these are: 'the question whether the misconduct complained of constitutes cruelty and the like for divorce purposes is determined primarily by its effect upon the particular person complaining of the acts. the question is not whether the conduct would be cruel to a reasonable person or a person of average ..... bhagat v. mrs. d. bhagat, : air1994sc710 supreme court had the occasion to define 'mental cruelty' as contemplated in indian laws particularly under the provisions of section 10 of hindu marriage act. these provisions are identical to other laws governing different communities in this country. the acid test to determine mental cruelty is that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 15 1995 (HC)

M.T. Carunya Vs. S. Joseph Chellappa

Court : Chennai

Reported in : I(1996)DMC562; (1996)IMLJ409

..... .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 ..... husband, then there will be no offence of adultery. there is no reason why this specialised definition of adultery should be extended to the interpretation of section 32 of the indian divorce act. it may be noted that under that section, the husband may obtain a decree on judicial separation of the ground of adultery committed by the wife, though as we have ..... .7. in sainapati v. sainapati air 1932 lah 116, a single judge of the court had to consider the expression 'marriage with another woman' under section 3(8) of the indian divorce act and observed that the section had defined only marriage with another woman and not marriage with another woman with adultery learned judge said that if after a second marriage, during ..... social ideas of the community as being a serious breach of matrimonial ties for the purpose of punishing the offender as having committed an offence against the society.4. the indian divorce act does not contain any definition of the expression 'adultery'. section 3, the interpretation clause, defines 'bigamy with adultery' as adultery with the same woman with whom the bigamy was committed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 21 1998 (SC)

Mr 'X' Vs. Hospital 'Z'

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1999SC495; JT1998(7)SC626; 1998(6)SCALE230; 1999(1)LC232(SC)

..... to obtain a decree for 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 given the right to obtain divorce if the other party to whom he or she was married was suffering from venereal disease in a communicable form. 36. the emphasis, ..... he knows about his patient even after his patient has died.'10. here, in this country, there is the indian medical council act, which controls the medical education and regulates the professional conduct. section 20a which was inserted by the indian medical council (amendment) act 1964 provides as under : professional conduct : (1) the council may prescribe the standards of professional conduct and .....

Tag this Judgment!


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