DINESH SINGH THAKUR versus SONAL THAKUR

DINESH SINGH THAKUR versus SONAL THAKUR

Appellant has not demonstrated that he would suffer grave injustice if injunction is not granted; both parties are permanent citizens of the USA and the foreign proceedings cannot be said to be oppressive or vexatious. Indian and US courts have concurrent jurisdiction. Anti-suit injunction should not be granted in this case.

Parties
Appellant Husband: Dinesh Singh Thakur; Respondent Wife: Sonal Thakur
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
17 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Order of Punjab and Haryana High Court Affirming Vacation of Ad Interim Injunction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Anti Suit Injunction, Concurrent Jurisdiction, Specific Relief Act Section 41, Hindu Marriage Act Sections 13 and 26
Family Law Equity Private International Law Anti Suit Injunction Concurrent Jurisdiction Specific Relief Act Section 41 Hindu Marriage Act Sections 13 and 26

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dinesh Singh Thakur

Appellant Husband

Sonal Thakur

Respondent Wife

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Order of Punjab and Haryana High Court Affirming Vacation of Ad Interim Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant-husband is entitled to an anti-suit injunction restraining the respondent-wife from pursuing her divorce petition in a US court

Ratio Decidendi

Appellant has not demonstrated that he would suffer grave injustice if injunction is not granted; both parties are permanent citizens of the USA and the foreign proceedings cannot be said to be oppressive or vexatious. Indian and US courts have concurrent jurisdiction. Anti-suit injunction should not be granted in this case.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No order as to costs