Sukhendu Das Vs Rita Mukherjee

FACTS:

In this case, the petitioner Mr. Sukhendu Das and the respondent Mrs. Rita Mukherjee were married in 1992 under Special marriage act 1954, were living separately since 2000. Both the Petitioners and Respondents are residents of West Bengal and are district judges of the same state. The petitioner said that the conflicts started arising due to the improper behavior by the Respondent as she failed to take care of his ill father and it was her moral duty to do so. The petitioner mentioned that he had appealed for divorce in the lower courts twice as well but was denied a fair assessment both the times. The first was denied in the civil court of Calcutta and the second appeal was denied in the High Court of West Bengal.

ISSUES:

Whether complete hostility and falling of marriage is a ground for divorce and whether the respondent is guilty of improper behavior and cruelty.

RULES:

Under section 27 of the Special Marriage Act,1954.

PETITIONER CONTENTION:

The petitioner contended that the Respondent refused to give him the custody of his child and did not even go to meet the petitioner when he was severely ill, all this was during when they were still married and the respondent was not agreeing for divorce. The petitioner said that they were living separately since 2000 and when he had filed for divorce in 2005, the respondent threatened the petitioner that she will file a criminal case against him and used foul language. 

RESPONDENT CONTENTION:

The Respondent did not participate in the proceedings before the trial court and only filed a written statement. The Respondent contended by filing a written statement denying the allegations made in the application filed by the applicant for divorce. She refused all the things mentioned in the application and asked for dismissal of the application for divorce.

COURT OBSERVATION:

The bench of Justice S.A Bobde and Justice Nageswara Rao observed that the petitioner could not prove the cruelty part and there was no evidence to support it. As both the petitioner and respondents were officers of court the Bench tried to persuade them to reconsider the decision but as the respondent had failed to appear in the court, the bench could not go ahead with this suggestion. 

JUDGEMENT:

The bench finally decided to accept the appeal for divorce considering the situation as both the parties had been living separately for 17 years. And the bench mentioned that the honorable court came to the decision as the marriage had broken down completely and the marriage between them could not work anymore. The court said that regarding the custody of the daughter, they could not do anything about it as she was 24 years old and not a minor. Further as the respondent was disinterested and did not appear before the court even once there was no point of not granting the divorce petition.

The post Appeal allowed for divorce of a married couple after 17 years of separation appeared first on LexForti .

Brijendra Singh Vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

FACTS:

The fact of this case is a Hindu wife who is not divorced but who is leading her life like a divorced woman wants to adopt a boy child to look after her till her life. She wished to adopt the child because she is alone till now from the date of her marriage so for her protection she wishes to adopt a child. So she filed a petition in the supreme court for the validity of the adoption. The wife because of her physical deformity lived separately from her husband and too far a very long period right from the marriage date. Hence she adopted a son. 

ISSUES:

Whether she is capable to take in adoption

LEGAL PROVISION:

Section 8 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956.

PETITIONER CONTENTION:

The petitioner contended that she has the right to take in adoption and also she is of sound mind to be capable of taking in adoption. And also she stated that she is alone in her house and no one is there to look after her so for her protection she wishes to take in adoption. 

RESPONDENT CONTENTION;

The respondent contended that she doesn’t have the right to take in adoption as she is not a legally divorced wife till she remains as a legally wedded wife in the eyes of law. Section 8 clearly states that a divorced person has only can take in adoption hence the adoption is not valid

OBSERVATION MADE BY THE COURT:

The court observed all the contention of the petitioner and the respondent and held that there is conceptual and contextual difference between a divorced person and one who is leading a life like a divorced woman both can not be equated and they been as a husband and wife in the eye of law because they did not get their divorce and there is no dissolution of marriage they just living separately.

JUDGMENT:    

The court after observation held that she is not capable to take in adoption and hence her adoption is invalid. As section 8 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act clearly states that only a divorced person has the right to take in adoption in our case is not so.

The post Divorcee’s power to adopt a child appeared first on LexForti .

Geeta Jagdish Vs Jagdish Mangtani

FACTS:

The fact of this case is the husband filed a petition on the ground of desertion by the wife. The wife had deserted the husband on the ground that he was not having enough income. She left the matrimonial home in Mumbai only after seven months of the marriage and started living with her parents in Gujarat where she gave birth to a child and then continue with her teaching job in Gujarat. No attempt was made by her to stay with her husband, which establish animus deserendi. Parties knew they’re earning before their marriage. However, the wife had chosen to adopt a course of conduct which proved desertion on her part without reasonable cause. It also amounts to wilful neglected to the husband. 

ISSUES:

Whether the husband is entitled to get a divorce?

LEGAL PROVISION:

Section 13 of The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

PETITIONER CONTENTION:

Petitioner contended that her wife is not living with him and she has deserted him. He was being lone for a long time. She also doesn’t have an idea to live with him. The reason for desertion is he is not earning money more. So the petitioner prays the court to get a divorce from her wife. 

RESPONDENT CONTENTION:

Respondent contended that she left her husband because her husband his not earning more and there is no way to survive with and to look after her child with his income so she left the matrimonial home and went to live with her parents.

OBSERVATION:

The court observed that she left the matrimonial house as soon she married ie within seven months that her husband’s earning is too low. The husband contended that his wife also know all about him before the marriage and she also accepted it then get married to him. After the marriage, she left the matrimonial home and started living with her parents. His husband is living separately for many years. Till now she is not accepting her husband and live together. Marriage is where two people should live together and share their bondings. 

JUDGMENT:

The court observed everything which both the parties to the marriage contended and held that the husband is entitled to get a divorce from her wife.

The post Husband is entitled to get divorce from his wife if she desereted him for his low earning appeared first on LexForti .