KRISHNAVENI RAI versus PANKAJ RAI & ANR.

KRISHNAVENI RAI versus PANKAJ RAI & ANR.

Where an appeal against a decree dissolving a marriage was filed after the period of limitation (and no stay was in place), Section 15 does not render a marriage solemnized after the decree void; a belated appeal filed after limitation does not make such a remarriage a nullity, and therefore the appellant was not disentitled to seek maintenance; the maintenance claim was remitted for determination and interim maintenance and arrears were ordered.

Parties
Appellant: KRISHNAVENI RAI; Respondent: PANKAJ RAI
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
19 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / On Appeal From High Court Judgment Dated 09.04.2019
Outcome
Appeal allowed; impugned orders set aside and matter remitted
Legal Topics
Maintenance Under Section 125 Cr.p.c., Nullity of Marriage, Hindu Marriage Act Section 15, Limitation and Belated Appeals
Family Law Marriage Law Criminal Procedure Maintenance Under Section 125 Cr.p.c. Nullity of Marriage Hindu Marriage Act Section 15 Limitation and Belated Appeals

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

KRISHNAVENI RAI

Appellant

PANKAJ RAI

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / On Appeal From High Court Judgment Dated 09.04.2019

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a second marriage solemnized during the pendency of an appeal from a decree of divorce is a nullity when there is no stay of the decree
  2. 2 Whether the appellant is entitled to maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. given the respondent's plea of nullity

Ratio Decidendi

Where an appeal against a decree dissolving a marriage was filed after the period of limitation (and no stay was in place), Section 15 does not render a marriage solemnized after the decree void; a belated appeal filed after limitation does not make such a remarriage a nullity, and therefore the appellant was not disentitled to seek maintenance; the maintenance claim was remitted for determination and interim maintenance and arrears were ordered.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; impugned orders set aside and matter remitted

Orders

  • Order dated 07.08.2017 of the Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge dismissing M.C. No.152 of 2015 set aside
  • Judgment and order dated 09.04.2019 of the High Court set aside