Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
India decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Supreme Court reconsidered maintenance, enhanced the wife’s monthly support to Rs.30,000 and the children’s to Rs.1,50,000 total, and held PF/ESPP deductions are not compulsory.
The Supreme Court upheld a divorce decree, holding that denial of conjugal relations and prolonged separation amounted to cruelty, and dissolved the marriage under Article 142.
The appellate courts correctly upheld the Family Court's findings that the appellant's conduct amounted to cruelty and that the respondent had established desertion under Sections 13(1)(ia) and 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act; the prolonged separation since 2018 showed the matrimonial bond had broken down beyond repair, and there was no perversity in the findings of fact, therefore the decree of divorce was affirmed, with maintenance modified to Rs.10,000 per month payable by the respondent to the appellant from the date of the Supreme Court order.
Source excerpt
Because the allegations against the appellants were, in substance, identical to those against the sister-in-law and were general and omnibus without any specific overt acts attributed to the appellants, and because of the unexplained delay in lodging the complaint which lent credence to the contention of a counter-blast to earlier divorce proceedings, continuation of criminal proceedings against the appellants could not be sustained and therefore those proceedings were to be quashed.
Source excerpt
The High Court's limitation of anticipatory bail to the stage of filing of the chargesheet was unsustainable; once anticipatory bail is granted it ordinarily continues without a fixed expiry unless special reasons are recorded, and risk should be managed by imposing conditions; accordingly the impugned order was set aside and the appellant directed to be released on anticipatory bail subject to conditions the Investigating Officer may impose; where new graver cognizable and non-bailable offences are added the court must reconsider bail and may order arrest under Sections 437(5) or 439(2) Cr.P…
Source excerpt
The High Court correctly held that the suit properties were, in large part, joint Hindu family properties given the admitted genealogy and existence of ancestral income-yielding lands; the burden lay on the appellant to prove self-acquisition and legal necessity for alienations by the Karta, which was not established except in limited items, the unregistered Will was properly treated as suspicious and not relied upon, and therefore the High Court's decree awarding the plaintiff a 5/16th share (with exclusion of specified items) was upheld; the appeals were dismissed.
Source excerpt
The High Court erred in treating welfare of the children in isolation and failing to consider other relevant factors and material orders (respondent’s removal of children without consent and passports, revocation of her custody by the Qatar Court, the Contempt Court’s finding, mediation and Family Court observations indicating the children’s inclination toward the father); therefore the High Court’s order restoring custody to the respondent was set aside and the matter remanded for reconsideration.
Source excerpt
The Court held that the phrase "any widow of his son" in Section 21(vii) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 includes widows irrespective of whether they became widows before or after the death of the father-in-law, and such widows are dependants entitled to claim maintenance from the deceased father-in-law's estate under Section 22; a narrow interpretation limited to widows of predeceased sons would be linguistically unsupported, arbitrary under Article 14 and violative of Article 21, and therefore impermissible.
Source excerpt
The High Court erred in privileging the father's statement over the marriage registrar's original entry and failed to apply a purposive construction of Section 3 of the 1986 Act aimed at securing the dignity and financial protection of divorced Muslim women; accordingly the appeals were allowed, the High Court judgment and order set aside, and the respondent was directed to remit the awarded amount directly into the appellant's bank account with compliance directions.
Source excerpt
The High Court's direction for DNA testing was set aside because the statutory presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 Evidence Act remained unrebutted (no strong evidence of non-access), the paternity issue was collateral to the criminal charges and lacked a direct nexus to the offences, and ordering DNA testing would disproportionately infringe the privacy and bodily autonomy of the appellant and the child contrary to Article 21; Sections 53 and 53A CrPC do not justify compulsion absent such nexus.
Source excerpt
Explore more
