Supreme Court of India Judgements

46660 Judgements hosted as on 19/11/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Matrimonial

I P C Matrimonial

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 498A, 323 and 504 — Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Sections 3 and 4 — Irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a ground for divorce — The court recognized that irretrievable breakdown of marriage, where the parties have been living separately for a significant period and all efforts at reconciliation have failed, can be a valid ground for divorce — This expands the grounds for divorce beyond the traditional grounds mentioned in the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.— One-time settlement as a mode of permanent alimony — The court allowed the parties to opt for a one-time settlement as a mode of permanent alimony, instead of periodic payments — This provides flexibility to the parties in resolving their financial obligations towards each other.

Jul 20, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 530 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KIRAN JYOT MAINI — Appellant Vs. ANISH PRAMOD PATEL — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Prashant Kumar Mishram, JJ.…

Matrimonial

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 13(1)(ia) – Divorce based on irretrievable breakdown of marriage – Ground of Irretrievable Breakdown – The court recognized irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a valid ground for divorce, even though it is not explicitly mentioned in the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – This expands the scope of grounds for divorce and provides a more compassionate approach to ending a marriage that has irreparably broken down.

May 11, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JATINDER KUMAR SAPRA — Appellant Vs. ANUPAMA SAPRA — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No(S).of…

Joint Family Property Matrimonial Property Matters

Suit for Partition – The Court found that ‘C’ remarriage extinguished her rights to her first husband’s property, and she could not pass on any title to the plaintiff – The Court applied the Hindu Widow’s Remarriage Act, 1856, and relevant case law to determine the impact of Chiruthey’s remarriage on her property rights – The Supreme Court concluded that the plaintiff could not inherit the property through ‘C’, as her rights were nullified upon remarriage, and the deeds did not confer valid title.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 287 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KIZHAKKE VATTAKANDIYIL MADHAVAN (DEAD) THR. LRS. — Appellant Vs. THIYYURKUNNATH MEETHAL JANAKI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Aniruddha Bose…

Matrimonial

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 9 and 13(1) (ia) – Divorce – The Supreme Court finds merit in the appellant/husband’s willingness to undergo the test and partially upholds the Trial Court’s order – The Supreme Court modifies the High Court’s order, directing the appellant/husband to undergo the medical test as per the Trial Court’s direction.

Apr 7, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DEEP MUKERJEE — Appellant Vs. SREYASHI BANERJEE — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No(S). of…

Constitution Matrimonial

Irretrievable breakdown of marriage – Exercise of jurisdiction under Article 142(1) of the Constitution of India is clearly permissible to do ‘complete justice’ to a ’cause or matter’ and this Court can pass an order or decree which a family court, trial court or High Court can pass and when such power is exercised, the question or issue of lack of subject-matter jurisdiction does not arise

Feb 4, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PRAKASHCHANDRA JOSHI — Appellant Vs. KUNTAL PRAKASHCHANDRA JOSHI @ KUNTAL VISANJI SHAH — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ.…

Matrimonial

Irretrievable breakdown of marriage – Divorce – Husband was about 89 years old and wife aged about 82 years – One should not be oblivious to the fact that the institution of marriage occupies an important place and plays an important role in the society – it would not be desirable to accept the formula of “irretrievable break down of marriage” as a strait-jacket formula for the grant of relief of divorce under Article 142 of the Constitution of India – Appeal dismissed.

Oct 15, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DR. NIRMAL SINGH PANESAR — Appellant Vs. MRS. PARAMJIT KAUR PANESAR @AJINDER KAUR PANESAR — Respondent ( Before : Aniruddha Bose and Bela M.…

Matrimonial

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Sections 13(1) and 13(1A) – Grant of Decree of divorce – Denial of – The parties in question have been living apart for fifteen years -there is no reason to prolong the distress of maintaining a marital status when they are not living together – In light of the mentioned reasons, the judgment of the Trial Court and the subsequent confirmation by the High Court is hereby overturned – As a result, the appeal is accepted, and a divorce decree is granted.

Sep 19, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SMT. ROOPA SONI — Appellant Vs. KAMALNARAYAN SONI — Respondent ( Before : Sanjiv Khanna and M. M. Sundresh, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No.…

Joint Family Property Matrimonial

Held, a child of a marriage which is null and void under Section 11 of HMA is statutorily conferred with legitimacy – Where a voidable marriage has been annulled by a decree of nullity under Section 12, of HMA a child ‘begotten or conceived’ before the decree has been made, is deemed to be their legitimate child notwithstanding the decree, if the child would have been legitimate to the parties to the marriage if a decree of dissolution had been passed instead of a decree of nullity

Sep 12, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH REVANASIDDAPPA AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. MALLIKARJUN AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI., J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra,…

Matrimonial

Parties have suffered an irretrievable breakdown of marriage and hence, in order provide complete justice, the this Court exercised the power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to grant mutual consent divorce to the parties and also closed all cases filed by the parties against each other.

Jun 3, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MANSI KHATRI — Appellant Vs. GAURAV KHATRI — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. ) Transfer Petition (Civil) No.…

You missed

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376 and 313 — Rape — False promise of marriage — Physical relationship with the complainant under the false promise of marriage, leading to her pregnancy and subsequent abortions — Whether the FIR should be quashed based on the allegations and the delay in filing the complaint — The petitioner argued that the relationship was consensual and the delay in filing the FIR undermines the credibility of the allegations — The respondent claimed that the petitioner deceived her with a false promise of marriage, leading to non-consensual physical relations — The Supreme Court quashed the FIR, noting the long-term consensual relationship and the lack of prima facie evidence for rape under Section 376 IPC —The Court emphasized the delay in filing the FIR and the nature of the relationship, which appeared consensual —The Court referred to previous judgments, highlighting the importance of prima facie evidence and the misuse of legal provisions —The FIR and all proceedings based on it were quashed, preventing abuse of the legal process.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120-B —Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d) — Financial misconduct and conspiracy — Whether the High Court was correct in discharging the respondent from the charges of conspiracy and financial misconduct — The CBI argued that the High Court conducted a mini-trial at the charge-framing stage and that there was sufficient suspicion to frame charges against the respondent — The respondent’s counsel argued that the material in the charge sheet did not make out a case against the respondent and that the High Court rightly discharged him —The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision to discharge the respondent, stating that mere suspicion was not enough to frame charges – The Court found that the respondent’s role was limited to signing the memorandum prepared by senior officers and participating in the Management Committee meeting, which approved the proposal — The Court emphasized that the proposal had passed through various committees and that the respondent’s actions did not amount to criminal misconduct — The appeal was dismissed, and the respondent was discharged from the charges — The trial against other accused persons will continue.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Municipal Laws

Patna Municipal Corporation Act, 1951 — Sections 146, 423 and 488(1) — The Patna Municipal Corporation imposed a royalty on advertisements, which was later increased — The respondents challenged this imposition, arguing it was a tax without legislative backing — Whether the royalty imposed by the Corporation was a tax and if it was legally enforceable without legislative sanction — The Corporation argued that the royalty was agreed upon by the parties and was not a tax — They contended that the enhancement of the rate was within their rights — The respondents argued that the imposition was a tax, which required legislative sanction, and the Corporation had no authority to levy it — The Division Bench quashed the enhancement, ruling that the Corporation had no power to impose the tax without legislative backing — The Court found that the royalty was not a tax but a fee agreed upon by the parties — It held that the Corporation’s actions were within the scope of the agreement — The Court distinguished between royalty and tax, emphasizing that royalty is based on an agreement, not statutory provision — The Court upheld the imposition of royalty as per the agreement but noted that the enhancement in rates was not challenged effectively — The judgment of the Division Bench was set aside.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Constitution

Citizenship Act, 1955 — Section 6A — Special provisions as to citizenship of persons covered by the Assam Accord — The case involves the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955, which grants citizenship to certain migrants from Bangladesh to Assam —The main issues include whether Parliament had the legislative competence to enact Section 6A, and if Section 6A violates Articles 6, 7, 14, 29, and 355 of the Constitution — Petitioners argue that Section 6A is unconstitutional as it conflicts with Articles 6 and 7, adopts unreasonable cut-off dates, and violates Articles 14, 29, and 355 — Respondents contend that Section 6A is within Parliament’s legislative competence under Article 11 and does not violate the Constitution — The judgment addresses the legislative competence of Parliament, the reasonableness of cut-off dates, and the impact on Assamese cultural identity — The court examines the historical context of citizenship provisions, the legislative intent behind Section 6A, and the scope of judicial review under Article 14 — The court analyzes the constitutional provisions on citizenship, the legislative objective of Section 6A, and the balance between legislative intent and constitutional mandates —The court concludes that Section 6A of the Citizenship Act is constitutional and does not violate the cited Articles of the Constitution.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw