Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Nurbibi Vs. Husen Lal

Nurbibi vs Husen Lal

Type Court Judgment Court Mumbai Decided Sep 06, 1883
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/334856

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Mumbai
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Family

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Act XI of 1865, Section of - Jurisdiction--Small Causes--Suit by the mother of a child to recover from the father the cost of its maintenance. -

Key legal issue
Family

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Nurbibi

Respondent

Husen Lal

Legal References

Reported In
(1883)ILR7Bom537

Excerpt

act xi of 1865, section of - jurisdiction--small causes--suit by the mother of a child to recover from the father the cost of its maintenance. - west, j.1. the obligation of a father to support his child is one imposed on him by the law of the family in some form or other, either of civil or criminal liability see bazeley v. forder l.r. 3. q.b. 564 under every civilized system. if the father fails to support a child, it is the mother's duty to nurture it if she can. whether she can recover the amount necessary for this purpose from the father according to the mahomedan law is a question that the court will have to try. but the father's obligation to recoup the mother and to provide money for the future maintenance of his child by a wife whom he has divorced during her pregnancy, is one which, if it subsists, does not arise from contract, but is imposed on the father by the law, without any bargain or assent on his part. the suit, therefore, in this case is not one cognizable by a small cause court, but by the ordinary civil court, and the order for returning the plaint made by the subordinate judge should be set aside, and the suit dealt with on its merits.

Full Judgment

West, J.

1. The obligation of a father to support his child is one imposed on him by the law of the family in some form or other, either of civil or criminal liability see Bazeley v. Forder L.R. 3. Q.B. 564 under every civilized system. If the father fails to support a child, it is the mother's duty to nurture it if she can. Whether she can recover the amount necessary for this purpose from the father according to the Mahomedan law is a question that the court will have to try. But the father's obligation to recoup the mother and to provide money for the future maintenance of his child by a wife whom he has divorced during her pregnancy, is one which, if it subsists, does not arise from contract, but is imposed on the father by the law, without any bargain or assent on his part. The suit, therefore, in this case is not one cognizable by a small Cause Court, but by the ordinary Civil Court, and the order for returning the plaint made by the Subordinate Judge should be set aside, and the suit dealt with on its merits.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial