HINDU MARRIAGE ACT 1956

THIS SECOND PART OF THE ACT DEALS WITH VOID AND VOIDABLE MARRIAGES AND MUTUAL DIVORCE AND ALTERNATE A RELIEF IN DIVORCE AND WHEN TO FILE A CASE IN THE COURT AND WHEN TO REMARRY AGAIN. 1.VOID MARRIAGES :- A MARRIAGE WHICH TOOK PLACE AGAINST TO THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.5 [i],[iv]AND [v] ARE NULL AND VOID. SEC.5[i] SAYS THAT WHEN AT THE TIME OF MARRIAGE, ANY SPOUSE WHETHER BRIDE OR BRIDEGROOM HAS A LIVING WIFE OR HUSBAND, THAT MARRIAGE IS NULL AND VOID. SEC.5[iv] SAYS THAT WHEN THE PARTIES ARE WITHIN THE PROHIBITED DEGREE RELATIONSHIP UNLESS THE CUSTOM OR USAGE GOVERNING EACH OF THEM PERMITS BETWEEN THE TWO, THE MARRIAGE IS NULL AND VOID. SEC.5[v] WHEN THE SPOUSES ARE SAPINDAS OF EACH OTHER, UNLESS THE CUSTOM OR USAGE PERMITS, THE MARRIAGE IS NULL AND VOID.MAY ON A PETITION BY EITHER PARTY THERETO AGAINST THE OTHER PARTY , THE MARRIAGE BE DECLARED BY A DECREE OF NULLITY. 2.VOIDABLE MARRIAGES :-SEC.12 [1] DEALS WITH THE MARRIAGES THAT ARE VOIDABLE AND ANNULLED [A] WHEN THE MARRIAGE IS NOT CONSUMATED DUE TO IMPOTENCY OF THE OTHER OR [B] WHEN THE MARRIAGE TOOK PLACE AGAINST TO SEC.5[ii] [a] AT THE TIME OF MARRIAGE NEITHER PARTY IS INCAPABLE OF GIVING VALID CONSENT DUE TO UNSOUND MIND OR [b] THOUGH CAPABLE OF GIVING CONSENT , UNFIT FOR MARRIAGE AND BEARING OF CHILDREN OR [c] HAS BEEN SUBJECT TO RECURRENT ATTACKS OF INSANITY OR EPILEPSY OR [C] WHEN THE CONSENT OF THE MINOR PETITIONER OR PARENTS OR GUARDIAN BY FORCE OR CONSENT OBTAINED BY PLAYING FRAUD AS TO THE NATURE OF THE CEREMONY OR AS TO ANY MATERIAL FACT OR CIRCUMSTANCE CONCERNING THE RESPONDENT OR [D] THAT THE RESPONDENT WAS AT THE TIME OF THE MARRIAGE,PREGNANT BY SOME PERSON OTHER THAN THE PETITIONER.SEC.12[2] DEALS WITH EXCEPTIONS SAYING THAT[a] [i]NO PETITION SHOULD BE FILED AFTER ONE YEAR AFTER CEASING OF FORCE OR DISCOVERY OF FRAUD AS STATED IN [C] OR [a] [ii]. THE PETITIONER WITH HIS FULL CONSENT LIVED WITH RESPONDENT EVEN AFTER DETECTING FRAUD AND CEASING OF FORCE OR [b][i]. ON THE GROUND OF [D] OF [1] PREGNANT , THE PETITIONER IS AN IGNORANT OF FACT AND HE OUGHT TO HAVE FILED A PETITION WITHIN ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF MARRIAGE AS PER [b][ii] AND NO MARITAL INTERCOURSE WAS TAKEN PLACE BETWEEN THEM AFTER THE DISCOVERY OF PREGNANCY.3 ALTERNATIVE RELIEF :- SEC.13 A DEALS WITH ALTERNATIVE RELIEF IN DIVORCE PROCEEDINGS. IF THE COURT SATISFY THAT THERE IS NO NEED TO GIVE DIVORCE, IT CAN GRANT JUDICIAL SEPARATION .4.MUTUAL DIVORCE :- SEC.13B DEALS WITH MUTUAL CONSENT DIVORCE [1] SAYS THAT SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT, WHEN BOTH PARTIES PRESENTED A PETITION BY SAYING THAT THEY ARE LIVING SEPARATELY FOR MORE THAN ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF MARRIAGE AND THAT THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO LIVE TOGETHER AND THAT THEY HAVE AGREED MUTUALLY FOR DISSOLVE OF THE MARRIAGE AND [2] AFTER 6 MONTHS BEFORE 18 MONTHS, IF THE PETITION IS NOT WITHDRAWN, THE COURT MAY ON HEARING BOTH PARTIES CAN GRANT DIVORCE 5. NO PETITION SHOULD BE FILED WITHINONE YEAR OF MARRIAGE:-SEC.14[1]. WITHOUT CONSENT OF THE COURT NO PETITION SHOULD BE FILED WITHIN ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF MARRIAGE EXCEPT IN EXCEPTIONAL CASES AND AS PER [2] COURT HAS TO CONSIDER THE CHILDREN IF ANY AND POSSIBILITY OF RECONCILIATION BEFORE EXPIRE OF ONE YEAR.6. sec.15 deals with when to remarry- when there is no appeal is presented with in the time and even presented is dismissed or when there is no right of appeal after dissolving the marriage by divorce decree, it shall be lawful for either party to the marriage to marry again.

HINDU MARRIAGE ACT 1956

HINDU MARRIAGE ACT COMPRISED IN SECS. NO.1 TO 30.. GENERALLY THE PROBLEMS BETWEEN THE SPOUSES ARE GOVERNED UNDER SEC.9, TO 28 A. 1.RESTITUTION OF CONJUGAL RIGHTS:-SEC.9 SAYS THAT WHEN EITHER SPOUSE, WITHOUT ANY REASONABLE CAUSE, WITHDRAWN, FROM THE SOCIETY OF THE OTHER SPOUSE, THE AGGRIEVED SPOUSE MAY FILE A CASE FOR RESTITUTION OF CONJUGAL RIGHTS. THE EXPLANATION THAT IS GIVEN UNDER THIS SECTION MAKES IT CLEAR THAT THE BURDEN LIES ON THE SPOUSE WHO WITHDRAW THE ASSOCIATION OF OTHER SPOUSE AND IT IS A BOUNDEN DUTY TO PROVE THAT FOR VALID REASONS ONLY -WITHDRAW THE SOCIETY OF OTHER 2.JUDICIAL SEPARATION :- SEC.10 [1] SAYS THAT ANY AGGRIEVED PARTY AMONG THE SPOUSES, MAY APPLY FOR JUDICIAL SEPARATION ON THE GROUNDS ON WHICH A DIVORCE PETITION CAN BE FILED THAT IS SEC.13[1] AND [2] AND ON INQUIRY THE COURT CAN PASS A DECREE FOR JUDICIAL SEPARATION AND IN THAT CIRCUMSTANCES THERE IS NO OBLIGATION ON ANY SPOUSE TO LEAD MARRITAL LIFE. SEC.10[2] DEALS THAT WHEN ANY PARTY APPLIED FOR RESCIND THE DECREE AND ON SATISFACTION RESCIND THE DECREE FOR THE REUNION OF BOTH SPOUSES. 3. DIVORCE :- SEC.13 SAYS ABOUT THE GROUNDS OF DIVORCE -SEC.13[1][i] THE SOLEMNIZATION AFTER OF MARRIAGE WHEN ANY SPOUSE HAS GOT ILLEGAL CONTACTS WITH OTHERS OR [ia] AFTER THE SOLEMNIZATION OF MARRIAGE,HAS TREATED THE PETITIONER WITH CRUELTY OR [ib] HAS DESERTED THE PETITIONER CONTINUOUSLY FOR THE PERIOD OF NOT LESS THAN TWO YEARS IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE PRESENTATION OF THE PETITION OR {ii} HAS CEASED TO BE HINDU BY CONVERTING INTO OTHER RELIGION OR [iii] HAS BEEN INCURABLY OF UNSOUND MIND,OR HAS BEEN SUFFERING CONTINUOUSLY OR INTERMITTENTLY FROM MENTAL DISORDER OF SUCH A KIND AND TO SUCH AN EXTENT THAT THE PETITIONER CANNOT REASONABLY BE EXPECTED TO LIVE WITH THE RESPONDENT OR [iv] HAS BEEN SUFFERING FROM A VIRULENT AND INCURABLE FORM OF LEPROSY OR [v] HAS BEEN SUFFERING FROM A VENEREAL DISEASES IN A COMMUNICABLE FORM OR [vi] HAS RENOUNCED THE WORLD BY ENTERING ANY RELIGIOUS ORDER OR [vii]HAS NOT BEEN HEARD OF AS BEING ALIVE FOR A PERIOD OF 7 YEARS OR MORE BY THOSE PERSONS WHO WOULD NATURALLY HAVE HEARD OF IT , HAD THAT BEEN ALIVE . SEC.13 [1A] [i]AND [ii] DIVORCE MAY BE GRANTED WHERE NO COHABITATION WAS RESUMED AFTER PASSING JUDICIAL SEPARATION OR RESTITUTION OF CONJUGAL RIGHTS FOR MORE THAN ONE YEAR. SEC.13[2] [i]DEALS WITH THAT THE WIFE CAN FILE DIVORCE PETITION IN THE CASE OF ANY MARRIAGE SOLEMNIZED BEFORE THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE ACT, THAT THE HUSBAND HAD MARRIED AGAIN BEFORE SUCH COMMENCEMENT OR THAT ANY OTHER WIFE OF THE HUSBAND MARRIED BEFORE SUCH COMMENCEMENT WAS ALIVE AT THE TIME OF THE SOLEMINZANTON OF THE MARRIAGE OF THE PETITIONER PROVIDED THAT IN EITHER CASE THE OTHER WIFE IS ALIVE AT THE TIME OF FILING THE CASE OR [ii] THAT THE HUSBAND HAS SINE THE SOLEMNIZATION THE MARRIAGE, BEEN FUILTY OF RAPE, SODOMY OR BESTIALITY OR [iii] THAT MAINTENANCE IS GRANTED UNDER HINDU ADOPTION AND MAINTENANCE SUIT OR UNDER SE C,125 OF CRPC AND NO RESUMPTION OF MARITAL LIFE FOR MORE THAN ONE YEAR OR UPWARDS [vi] THAT HER MARRIAGE WHETHER CONSUMMATED OR NOT WAS SOLEMNIZED BEFORE SHE ATTAINED THE AGE OF 15 YEARS AND SHE HAS REPUDIATED THE MARRIAGE AFTER ATTAINING THAT AGE BUT BEFORE ATTAINING THE AGE OF 18 YEARS.

FOREIGN DECREE OF DIVORCE

A FOREIGN DECREE OF DIVORCE OBTAINED BY HUSBAND, PENDING SUIT FOR DIVORCE AT INDIA AND WITHOUT SUBJECTING THE WIFE FOR THE JURISDICTION OF USA COURT- IS NOT BINDING AND VALID AND NOT ENFORCEABLE AGAINST WIFE-AIR 2003 DEL.175.

MAINTENANCE TO SECOND WIFE

SECS.5,7,18,20 AND 22 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT- AS PER THE PROVISO OF SEC.5 , THE SECOND MARRIAGE IS VOID DURING THE LIFE TIME OF FIRST WIFE AND AS PER SEC.18 HINDU WIFE MEANS LEGALLY WEDDED WIFE AND AS SHE IS NOT ENTITLED FOR SEPARATE RESIDENT AND MAINTENANCE-AIR 2008 DELHI 1

MAINTENANCE CLAIM TO SECOND WIFE

SECS.5,11,AND 25 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT-IT IS WELL KNOWN AND RECOGNIZED LEGAL POSITION THAT CUSTOMARY HINDU LAW LIKE MOHAMMEDAN LAW PERMITTED BIGAMOUS MARRIAGES WHICH WERE PREVALENT IN ALL HINDU FAMILIES AND MORE SO IN ROYAL HINDU FAMILIES. IT IS ONLY AFTER THE HINDU LAW WAS CODIFIED BY ENACTMENTS INCLUDING THE PRESENT ACT THAT BAR AGAINST BIGAMOUS MARRIAGES WAS CREATED BY SEC.5[1] OF THE ACT. KEEPING INTO CONSIDERATION, THE PRESENT STATE OF THE STATUTORY HINDU LAW, A BIGAMOUS MARRIAGE MAY BE DECLARED ILLEGAL IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT BUT IT CAN NOT BE SAID TO IMMORAL SO AS TO DENY EVEN THE RIGHT OF ALIMONY OR MAINTENANCE TO A SPOUSE FINANCIALLY WEAK AND ECONOMICALLY DEPENDENT . IT IS WITH THE PURPOSE OF NOT RENDERING A FINANCIALLY DEPENDENT SPOUSE DESTITUTE THAT SEC.25 ENABLES THAT THE COURT TO AWARD MAINTENANCE AT THE TIME OF PASSING ANY TYPE OF DECREE RESULTING IN BREACH IN MARRIAGE RELATIONSHIP. SEC. 25 IS AN ENABLING PROVISION. IT EMPOWERS THE COURT TO GRANT MAINTENANCE TO WIFE -2005[1]CCC84SC.

MUSLIM WOMEN- MAINTAINANCE

EVEN A DIVORCED MUSLIM IS ENTITLED FOR MAINTENANCE TILL HER REMARRIAGE 2010 SAR CRIMINAL 96

ABETMENT OF SUICIDE

WHEN THE ACCUSED BLAMED THE DECEASED AS THIEF AND AFTER TWO DAYS THE DECEASED COMMITTED SUICIDE, DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE ACCUSED ABETED-2010 SAR CRIMINAL 156.

NO AFFIDAVIT EVIDENCE FOR ACCUSED

THE RIGHT TO EVIDENCE BY WAY OF AFFIDAVIT IS GIVEN ONLY TO COMPLAINANT UNDER SEC.145[1] OF NIACT. THE ACCUSED HAS NO RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE BY WAY OF AFFIDAVIT-2010 SAR CRIMINAL 126

CHEQUE BOUNS CASE

vicarious liability of a directors under sec.141 r/w 138-must be specifically pleaded and must be proved and it cannot be inferred-2010 SAR CRIMINAL 251

DELAY IN FILING F.I.R.

EFFECT OF LATE RECEIPT OF FIR BY THE COURT-PW1 HAD RUN AWAY FROM THE PLACE OF OCCURRENCE AFTER WITNESSING THE ASSUALT-EVIDENC OF PROSECUTION NEEDS CLOSE SCRUTING- DELAY IN RECEIVING FIR-FATAL TO THE PROSECUTION CASE-2010 SAR CRIMINAL 438.

INTERIM BAIL PENDING BAIL APPLICATION

SEC.438 OF CR.P.C. POWER TO GRANT REGULAR BAIL INCLUDES THE POWER TO GRANT INTERIM BAIL- PETITION U/SEC. 438 FOR GRANT OF ANTICIPATORY BAIL HAS BEEN REJECTED- THE PETITIONER MAY APPLY FOR REGULAR BAIL AND ALONG WITH THE SAID APPLICATION, HE MAY FILE AN APPLICATION FOR INTERIM BAIL PENDING DISPOSAL OF REGULAR BAIL APPLICATION -THIS POWER IS INHERENT IN THE POWER TO GRANT BAIL-2010 SAR CRIMINAL 551.

AGGRIEVED PERSON SEC.199 OF CR.PC

A THIRD PARTY CANNOT FILE DEFEMATION CASE AGAINST THE CELEBRITY WHO GAVE OPINION ON PRE-MARITAL SEX AND FURTHER MORE IT IS NOT A DEFAMATORY WORDS OR OBSECENITY WORDS-2010 SAR CRIMINAL 518

WHO IS JUVENILE

SECS.2[K],2[L],7A AND 49 R/W RULES 12 AND 98 OF THE RULES 2007,-APPLICABILITY OF -ALL PERSONS WHO WERE BELOW THE AGE OF 18 YEARS ON THE DATE OF COMMISSION OF THE OFFENCE EVEN PRIOR TO 1stAPRIL 2001 WOULD BE TREATED AS JUVENILES EVEN IF THE CLAIM OF JUVENILITY IS RAISED AFTER THEY HAVE ATTAINED THE AGE OF 18 YEARS ON OR BEFORE THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE ACT 2000 AND WERE UNDERGOING SENTENCES UPON BEING CONVICTED-OFFENCE UNDER SEC.302,307 IPC-ACCUSED SENTENCED FOR LIFE-IN THE AGE OF APPELLANT ON THE DATE OF COMMISSION OF OFFENCE WAS 16 YEARS,9 MONTHS AND 8 DAYS ACCUSED IS HELD TO BE A JUVENILE AND IS ENTITLED FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ACT 2000- ACCUSED HAS UNDER GONE 2 YEARS ,4MONTHS AND 4DAYS- SENTENCE IS QUASHED-2010 SAR CRIMINAL 531.

CHEQUE BOUNS CASE

SEC.138 AND 147-OFFENCE OF DISHONOUR OF CHEQUE-COMPOUNDING OF THE OFFENCE AT LATER STAGES OF LITIGATION-PERMISSIBLE-IT IS THE COMPENSATORY ASPECT OF THE REMEDY SHOULD BE GIVEN PRIORITY OVER THE PUNITIVE ASPECT-GUIDELINES FOR A GRADED SCHEME OF IMPOSING COSTS ON PARTIES WHO UNDULY DELAY COMPOUNDING OF THE OFFENCE IS BEING FRAMED. AT FIRST OR SECOND STAGE OF HEARING OF THE CASE, MAY BE ALLOWED WITHOUT IMPOSING ANY COST -AT A SUBSEQUENT STAGE, CAN BE ALLOWED SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION THAT HE HAS TO PAY 10% OF THE CHEQUE AMOUNT AND IF APPLICATION OR REVISION IS MADE, MAY BE ALLOWED ON CONDITION TO PAY 15% OF THE CHQUE AMOUNT BY WAY OF COST-FINALLY BEFORE SUPREMECOURT THE FIGURE WOULD BE TO 20 % OF THE CHEQUE AMOUNT-2010 SAR CRIMINAL 501.

CHEQUE BOUNS CASE

SEC.138 AND 139-DISHONOUR OF CHEQUE ON ACCOUNT OF "STOP PAYMENT"-POST DATED CHEQUE IN QUESTION WAS BLANK ONE BEARING HIS SIGNATURE HAS BEEN LOST- ADMISION OF SIGNATURE-PRESUMPTION OF A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE DEBT CAN BE DRAWN-PENAL PROVISIONS OF SEC.138 ATTRACTS-2010 SAR CRIMINAL 568

DOWRY HARASSMENT CASES

MERE BALD STATEMENT AND ALLEGATIONS THAT THE VICTIM HAS SUBJECTED TO HARASSMENT AND CRUELTY PRIOR TO DEATH NOT SUFFICIENT TO ATTRACT SEC.304B AND NO CHARGES FRAMED UNDER DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT ACCUSED ENTITLED FOR ACQUITAL-2010 SAR CRIMINAL564

FAMILY SETTLEMENT DEED-HINDU LAW

AFTER THE DEED OF FAMILY SETTLEMENT WHICH WAS ACCEPTED AND ACTED UPON, CANNOT BE QUESTIONED LATER AS INVALID-2010 SAR CIVIL 138

CUSTODY OF MINOR CHILD

AS PER SEC.12 OF GUARDIAN AND WARDS ACT- A CHILD WHO IS STAYING WITH HER MATERNAL GRANDFATHER, UNCLE, AFTER THE DEATH OF MOTHER, CAN NOT BE SHIFTED TO THE CUSTODY OF FATHER AGAINST TO THE WISHES OF CHILD-2010 SAR CIVIL 176.

WHO IS THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OR.22 RULE 5

SUBSTITUTION ON THE BASIS OF WILL- DETERMINATION OF THE QUESTION AS TO WHO IS T HE L.R. UNDER OR.22 IS ONLY FOR THE PURPOSES OF BRINGING LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE ON RECORD AND DOES NOT OPERATE AS RESJUDICATA AND A DECREE CAN BE PASSED SUBJECT TO PRODUCING PROBATE OF THE WILL DEED-2010 SAR CIVIL 145

IMPLIED GRANT- EASEMENT

IMPLIED GRANT-CAN BE INFERRED FROM THE CIRCUMSTANCES FOR THE REASON THAT NO OTHER PATHWAY WAS PROVIDED FOR ACCESS TO "A" SCHEDULE PROPERTY OF THE PLAINT ,EXCEPT THROUGH "B" SCHEDULE PROPERTY OF PLAINT FROM THE BEGINING TILL DISPUTE AROSE, HENCE IT CAN BE TREATED AS A IMPLIED GRANT AS THERE IS NO WAY TO ENJOY THE "A" SCHEDULE PROPERTY-2010 SAR CIVIL 149

CIVIL PROCEDURE OR.9, RULE 9 BY L.RS.

WHEN A PARTY DIED AFTER DISMISSING T HE SUIT FOR DEFAULT, HIS/HER LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES CAN FILE RESTORATION PETITION-2010 SAR CIVIL 101.

CIVIL PROCEDURE OR.9, RULE 9

WHEN A PARTY DIED AFTER DISMISSING T HE SUIT FOR DEFAULT, HIS/HER LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES CAN FILE RESTORATION PETITION-2010 SAR CIVIL 101.

HINDU MARRIAGE -CONDONATION OF ALLEGATIONS

SEC.9 CONDONATION OF ALLEGATIONS - PROCEEDINGS UNDER SEC.9 -COMPROMISE WAS ARRIVED AT BEFORE THE LOK ADALAT- STATEMENTS WERE RECORDED AND PASSED AN ORDER AS WITHDRAWN DUE TO COMPROMISE- BY COMPROMISE THE HUSBAND CONDONED THE ACT OF WIFE WHICH CAN BE RE AGITATED-2010 SAR CIVIL 218

ADVERSE POSSESSION

PROPERTIES CHANGED HANDS AT LEAST TWICE AFTER THE INITIAL AGREEMENT FOR SALE-NO OBJECTION AT ANY POINT OF TIME BY PLAINTIFF-POSSESSION WAS HOSTILE AND ADVERSE TO THE INTEREST OF THE PLAINTIFF- SUIT AFTER THE LAPSE OF 12 YEARS NOT MAINTAINABLE AS THE OTHER SIDE PERFECTED BY ADVERSE POSSESSSION-2010 SAR CIVIL 198.

LAND ACQUISATION

SEC.23 [1-A] AND SEC.30 AND SEC.25 CLAIMANTS ARE ENTITLED TO THE ADDITIONAL MARKET VALUE AND SOLATIUM WHEN THE AWARD WAS PASSED AFTER 30-4-1982 AND WHAT IS CLAIMED IN AWARD PROCEEDING BEFORE LAO IS NOT BINDING ON THE CLAIMANT AND HE CAN CLAIM MORE THAN THAT IN COURT PROCEEDINGS-2010 SAR CIVIL 429,431.

LAND ACQUISATION

SEC.23 [1-A] AND SEC.30 AND SEC.25 CLAIMANTS ARE ENTITLED TO THE ADDLTIONAL MARKET VALUE AND SOLATIUM WHEN THE AWARD WAS PASSED AFTER 30-4-1982 AND WHAT IS CLAIMED IN AWARDING PROCEEDING BEFORE LAO IS NOT BINDING ON THE CLAIMANT AND HE CAN CLAIM MORE THAN THAT IN COURT PROCEEDINGS-2010 SAR CIVIL 429,431.

court fee and suitable reliefs

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PRAYER FOR CANCELLATION AND DECLARATION IN REGARD TO A DEED OF TRANSFER-WHERE THE EXECUTANT OF DEED WANTS IT TO BE ANNULLED, HE HAS TO SEEK CANCELLATION OF THE DEED AND TO PAY COURT FEE ON THE VALUE OF SALE DEED-BUT IF A NON-EXECUTANT SEEKS ANNULMENT OF A DEED, HE HAS TO FILE FOR DECLARATION AS NOT BINDING AND HAS TO PAY FIXED COURT FEE-2010 SAR CIVIL 403

medical negligence

CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT SEC.2[1][0] AND 14-when death certificate revealing that the patient died due to malaria and when the doctor who treated the patient that he has not treated for malaria, then the question of examining an expert for prove the line of treatment is unnecessary, entitled for damages-2010SARCIVIL551

GOVERNMENT SUIT

AS SEC.79 AND UNDER OR.27, RULE 1 OF C.P.C, NO INDIVIDUAL OFFICER OF THE GOVERNMENT CAN FILE A SUIT NOR INITIATE ANY PROCEEDINGS IN THE NAME AND POST , HE IS HOLDING-2010 SAR CIVIL 601.

ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN-SUCCESSION

AS PER SEC.16 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, A CHILD BORN OUT OF VOID AND VOIDABLE MARRIAGE IS NOT ENTITLED TO CLAIM INHERITANCE IN ANCESTRAL COPARCENERY PROPERTY BUT IS ENTITLED ONLY TO CLAIM SHARE IN SELF ACQUIRED PROPERTIES, IF ANY-2010SAR CIVIL621

DIVORCE UNDER HINDU MARRIAGE ACT

even in exparte evidence, in divorce petition, husband has to prove all allegations as per sec.13[1][ia] of hindu marriage act, otherwise the petition is liable to be dismissed eventhough there is no evidence of wife-2010SAR609.

MUTUAL DIVORCE WITHIN 6 MONTHS

WAIVER OF SIX MONTHS PERIOD AS PER SEC.13-B[2] OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT. THE JUDGEMENT MADE INMANISH GOEL [2010[3]ALT36SC] AND AJANTA KISHORE[2002[10]SCC194 GRANTING PERMISSION UNDER ART.142 AS CONSTITUTIONAL FUNCTIONARIES- ALL ARE REFERRED TO CJ FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS=2010[4]ALT50SC.

PARTITION SUIT -SISTER

THE SISTER WHO WAS MARRIED ABOUT 22 YEARS BACK, CANNOT FILE A SUIT FOR PARTITION AGAINST HER BROTHER, AFTER THE LAPSE OF 22 YEARS, WOULD BE TREATED AS SHE HAD CEASED TO BE MEMBER OF JOINT FAMILY-2009[2]CCC.A.P.287.

ESCHEWING OF EVIDENCE

WHEN A WITNESS NOT TURNED UP FOR FURTHER CROSS EXAMINATION, THE WHOLE EVIDENCE COULD NOT BE ESCHEWED-2009[5] ALT518

SEC.498-A AND SEC.406 IPC

SEC.498-A IS LIMITED TO ONLY BLOOD RELATIONS OR THE RELATIONS BY MARRIAGE AND NOT INCLUDE A FOSTER SISTER/RELATIONS-IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED-2010 S.A.R CRIMINAL 611.

FUTUR PROSPECTS OF DECEASED IN ACCIDENT CLAIM

50% OF ACTUAL SALARY OF THE DECEASED IN MOTOR ACCIDENT HAS TO BE ADDED TOWARDS FUTURE PROSPECTS OF INCREASED IN SALARY AND PROMOTIONS ETC., OF THE DECEASED WHERE THE DECEASED IS HAVING PERMANENT JOB AND IS AGED BELOW 40 YEARS-2010[4] ALT609

SUIT AGAINST DEAD PERSON-EFFECT

EVEN SUIT IS FILED AGAINST DEAD PERSON- SUIT NOT ABATED- EITHER UNDER OR.1 RULE 10 OR UNEDER OR.22, RULE 4 OF CPC- LEGAL HEIRS CAN BE IMPLEADED-2010[4]ALT305.

LIMITATION FOR RECOVERY OF BANK DEBT

PERIOD OF LIMITATION FOR RECOVERY OF DEBT DUE TO BANK IN TERMS OF RECOVERY CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, IS ONLY 4 YEARS BUT NOT 12 YEARS AS THE LIMITATION ACT IS NOT APPLICABLE - ANY PRESCRIPTION OF TIME IS ONLY DIRECTORY AND NOT MANDATORY-2010[4] ALT 484.

RESCISSION OF DECREE

SEC.28 OF SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT FOR RESCISSION OF DECREE FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF AGREEMENT OF SALE APPLIES NOT ONLY TO CASES OF NON-PAYMENT OF PURCHASE MONEY BY DHR, BUT ALSO TO CASES OF NON-DEPOSIT OF OTHER SUMS WHICH THE COURT HAS ORDERED BY COURT TO PAY SUCH AS COST OF STAMP PAPERS, REGISTRATION EXPENSES ETC., WITHIN THE TIME PRESCRIBED BY COURT IN THE DECREE-2010[4] ALT 134.

RECOUNT OF VOTES

NO COURT CAN PASS AN ORDER FOR RECOUNTING OF VOTES AS A MATTER OF COURSE, UNLESS A CLEAR IRREGULARITY OR MISTAKE THAT CREPT INTO THE ELECTION PROCESS AND WARRANTING OF RECOUNT WAS TAKEN PLACE.-2010[4]ALT121

RETURN OF DOCUMENT AFTER SUIT

AS PER RULE 115 OF AP CIVIL RULES OF PRACTICE, ALL THE DOCUMENTS ARE RETURNABLE AFTER TRIAL=2010[4]ALT217

NON-EXAMINATION OF ALL WITNESSES

IT IS NOT MANDATORY TO EXAMINE ALL WITNESSES CITED IN THE COMPLAINT FOR TAKING COGNIZANCE UNDER SEC.202 OF CR.P.C.

ACCIDENT CLAIMS

WHEN A LABOURER DIED WHILE TRAVELLING IN TRALLY ALONG WITH GOODS , IS NOT ENTITLED TO CLAIM COMPENSATION FROM THE INSURANCE COMPANY , IN THE ABSENCE OF PAYMENT OF EXTRA PRIMIUM-2010[4]ALT8

DIVORCE UNDER HINDU MARRIAGE ACT

NO DECREE OF DIVORCE CAN BE PASSED UNDER SEC.13 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT SIMPLY BECAUSE BO TH PARTIES ARE UNDER DISAGREEMENTS OR DISLIKES-2010[4]ALT799

ATTACHMENT O F SALARY

WHEN ANY PART OF ATTACHABLE PORTION OF SALARY OF J.DR. WAS UNDER ATTACHMENT IN EXECUTION OF DECREE FOR A TOTAL PERIOD OF 24 MONTHS, IT IS EXEMPT FROM FURTHER ATTACHMENT IN EXECUTION OF SAME DECREE EVEN IF THERE IS A GAP OF 12 MONTHS AFTER COMPLETION OF 24 MONTHS OF ATTACHMENT IN VIEW OF PROVISO TO CLAUSE [i] OF SEC.60 [1] CPC-2010[4]ALT787

ACCIDENT CLAIMS

WHEN A PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.163-A INSTEAD OF FILING THE SAME UNDER SEC.166 AS THE DECEASED WAS EARNING RS.40.000/- PER MONTH, CANNOT BE DISMISSED AND IT CAN BE HEARD UNDER SEC.166 OF M.V.ACT -2010[4]ALT609

SEC. 64 CPC AND OR.38 RULE 5 CPC

THE EXECUTING COURT HAS NO JURISDICTION TO QUESTION THE VALIDITY OF JUDGEMENT OF AGREEMENT OF SALE OF SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE SUIT, EVEN THOUGH THE PROPERTY IS ATTACHED BEFORE JUDGEMENT IN MONEY RECOVERY SUIT-2010[4]ALT369

ELECTRICITY ACT

SEC.164 OF ELECTRICITY ACT 2003 UNDER G.O.MS.NO115, CONFER AUTHORITY ON AP TRANS CO, TO LAY OVERHEAD ELECTRICAL LINES AND POLES ON PRIVATE LAND WITHOUT ACQUISITION AND CONSENT. WHERE AS WORKS LICENCEE RULES 2006, RULE.3 MAKES IT ON OBLIGATION TO OBTAIN PERMISSION FROM THE OWNER WHILE LAYING LINES AND POLES ON PRIVATE LANDS. HENCE ANY DAMAGE OCCURRED TO OWNER , HE CAN CLAIM COMPENSATION FROM THE ELECTRICITY DEPARTMENT-2010[4]ALT758

FAMILY LAW

HINDU MARRIAGE ACT SEC.24- AFTER GRANTING INTERIM MAINTAINANCE, PENDING TRIAL ,EVEN THOUGH HE LOSS JOB, THE LIABILT Y OF THE HUSBAND TO PAY MAINTAINANCE REMAINS GOOD AS HE IS CAPABLE OF EARNING-2010[4] ALT824.