ROHINI KUMARI versus NARENDRA SINGH

ROHINI KUMARI versus NARENDRA SINGH

Desertion by wife had been proved without reasonable cause and without consent as required by s.10(1)(a) of Hindu Marriage Act, since husband's second marriage did not have any impact on wife's mind to cause her to continue to live apart and continue the desertion; rights under maintenance statutes do not constitute reasonable cause within the meaning of Hindu Marriage Act.

Parties
Appellant: Rohini Kumari; Respondent: Narendra Singh
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
02 December 1971
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal by Special Leave From Allahabad High Court, Limited to Question of Law Under S.10(1)(a) of Hindu Marriage Act
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Marriage, Judicial Separation, Desertion, Maintenance

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rohini Kumari

Appellant

Narendra Singh

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal by Special Leave From Allahabad High Court, Limited to Question of Law Under S.10(1)(a) of Hindu Marriage Act

  1. 1 Whether desertion by wife was 'without reasonable cause' under s.10(1)(a) of Hindu Marriage Act, in light of husband's remarriage
  2. 2 Whether provisions of Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, permit wife to live separately and provide reasonable cause for desertion

Ratio Decidendi

Desertion by wife had been proved without reasonable cause and without consent as required by s.10(1)(a) of Hindu Marriage Act, since husband's second marriage did not have any impact on wife's mind to cause her to continue to live apart and continue the desertion; rights under maintenance statutes do not constitute reasonable cause within the meaning of Hindu Marriage Act.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Parties to bear their own costs in this Court