In a landmark judgement, Supreme Court has defined consent in relation to sexual relations being obtained on the premise of getting married. Thus, wherein a couple had sexual relations and the consent of the woman in the said relationship was obtained on the basis that the man told her that they would get married, and
Delhi High Court has held that an order passed for cohabitation does not give sexual rights to either party. The Court cannot enforce sexual relations between the parties. The Courts can only legally ask either party to cohabit but the courts do not and cannot enforce sexual intercourse.
Wherein a wife demanded privacy and wanted her husband to get another house as they were living with 8 people in a 3BHK, the Delhi High Court held that the wife’s demands were valid and the right to privacy is a fundamental right that the wife is entitled to. The petition was filed by the husband
Wherein a man was seeking nullity on the marriage as his marriage was solemnized with pheras around an agarbatti, the Bombay High Court dismissed his appeal. The Bench held that sacred fire has not been defined under the Act. The court has said: What is a sacred fire has not been defined in the Act. The fact that
Wherein a husband was trying to get out of paying maintenance on the pretext of wife earning more and he has his parents to look after, Punjab and Haryana High Court decided that:
The Punjab and Haryana High Court inAmit Kumar v. Navjot Dubey,denied to accept the husbands contention and upheld the decision of the district
Wherein a property was sold to another party which had a re-conveyance deed/clause which said that in the event of resale, the said property would reconvene back to the original party. The argument here is whether said property is actually ancestral property or not. In order to arrive at a decision whether this property is
Wherein a drunk man is refusing to give his blood sample to check his alcohol level, can he be compelled to give his blood sample? Or would the compelling of blood sample fall under the purview of violating his right to self incrimination granted to him under Art. 20(3) of the constitution of India? “this Court finds
however within one its not. In a PIL filed before the Delhi High Court to declare Martial Rape as a ground for divorce, the same was refused.
A PIL was filed in the Delhi High Court to declare Martial Rape as a ground for divorce. The Petition was dismissed by a Division bench consisting of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Hari Shankar on the grounds that the Court did not have power to legislate under Article 226 of the Constitution.
A Supreme Court bench consisting of Justice Kishan Kaul and Justice KM Joseph passed an order against the Allahabad High Court, where it was stated that a victim has the right to appeal against any order of acquittal of the accused under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In the above case the accused
In a recent judgement pronounced by the Ontario Court, where a woman agreed to have sex with the man on the condition that they would use a condom, he penetrated without using the same and putting the woman to a danger of unwanted pregnancy.
The man and woman met through an online dating site where they
n an execution case filed by the SBI Cards and payments, where the Respondent was evading service of notice, the Court held that the notice can be served in a PDF format for the purpose of Order XXI Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The above method was adopted when the Respondent evaded calls
In an application filed under section 24 of the Code of civil procedure for the transfer of matrimonial proceedings, the Calcutta Court rejected it. The transfer application was to transfer the proceedings from Alipore to Birbhum Court on the following grounds: That the wife has a 5 year old daughter residing with her at her parental
In the case Rani Sethi vs Sunil Sethi, the trial court had ordered the wife to pay maintenance to the husband which was challenged by the wife. The claim by the wife was that the court has erred in considering the fact that she had to maintain her two children. Further on the perusal of records
In the case of Smt. Mamta Jaiswal vs Rajesh Jaiswal, where a woman was extremely qualified and held a degree of Msc, M.C. M.Ed was not working. The husband filed a divorce against her on the grounds of cruelty, she was awarded alimony of Rs. 800/- as pendente lite alimony and travelling expenses for attending
The Supreme Court in the case of Vinny Parmar vs Paramvir Parmar on 20 July, 2011 held that no fixed formula can be laid for fixing the amount of maintenance. It has to be in the nature of things which depend on various facts and circumstances of each case.. The Supreme Court found only issue in