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.

In Re: Talaprolu Eswaramma

Type Court Judgment Court Andhra Pradesh Decided Jul 17, 1959
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/427545

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
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
S.R. No. 6720 of 1959 and Appeal No. of 1959
Subject
Family;Civil

Case Summary

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

Family - restitution of conjugal right - Sections 9 (1) and 28 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Sections 26 and 96 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - appeal filed against decree ordering restitution of conjugal rights numbered as civil miscellaneous appeal - contended that proceedings resulting in said decree did not...

Key legal issue
Family;Civil
Acts & sections
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Sections 9(1) and 28; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 26 and 96

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

In Re: Talaprolu Eswaramma

Advocate Valluri Parthasarathi, Adv.

Legal References

Acts
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Sections 9(1) and 28; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 26 and 96
Reported In
AIR1960AP66

Excerpt

family - restitution of conjugal right - sections 9 (1) and 28 of hindu marriage act, 1955 and sections 26 and 96 of code of civil procedure, 1908 - appeal filed against decree ordering restitution of conjugal rights numbered as civil miscellaneous appeal - contended that proceedings resulting in said decree did not start as suit under section 26 - appeal against decree for restitution of conjugal rights under section 9 (1) would be a regular appeal and not a civil miscellaneous appeal - held, now initiation of proceedings as suit not relevant in regarding appeal as regular. - - under section 28, it is provided that all decrees and orders made by the court in any proceeding under the act shall he enforced in like manner as the decrees and orders of the court made in the excise of the original civil jurisdiction, and may be appealed from under any law for the time being in force......25 enacts that at the time of passing any decree, orders may be passed for maintenance and support also.under section 28, it is provided that all decrees and orders made by the court in any proceeding under the act shall he enforced in like manner as the decrees and orders of the court made in the excise of the original civil jurisdiction, and may be appealed from under any law for the time being in force. so, a marked distinction is made in the act between decrees and orders. the decrees and orders are made appealable under section 28 according to the law for the time being in force, i. e., the provisions of the civil procedure code. the decrees would consequently be appealable under section 28 of the hindu marriage act read with section 96 c. p. c., and the appeal as against a decree for resitution of conjugal rights under section 9(1) would be a regular appeal.the mere fact that the proceeding does not start as a suit under the terms of section 26 c. p. c. by the presentation of a plaint or in any manner prescribed by the rules framed under the provisions of the civil procedure code does not affect the question. a similar view was taken by me in s. r. no. 35641 of 1958 in regard to an appeal arising out of proceeding under section 295 of the indian succession act for the grant of a probate.2. the reference is answered accordingly.

Full Judgment

ORDER

Umamaheswaram, J.

1. The short question that falls to be decided is whether an appeal filed against a decree ordering restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act (XXV of 1955) should be numbered as a regular appeal or us a civil miscellaneous appeal. Sri Valluri Parthasarathi the learned Advocate for the petitioner invited my attention to the several provisions of the Act drawing a distinction between decrees and orders. Sections 9, 10, 11 and 12, relate to decrees tor judicial separation, decrees of nullity and decrees of divorce. Sections 24 - 26 relate to passing orders for maintenance and expenses of proceeding and for custody of children. Section 25 enacts that at the time of passing any decree, orders may be passed for maintenance and support also.

Under Section 28, it is provided that all decrees and orders made by the Court in any proceeding under the Act shall he enforced in like manner as the decrees and orders of the Court made in the excise of the original civil jurisdiction, and may be appealed from under any law for the time being in force. So, a marked distinction is made in the Act between decrees and orders. The decrees and orders are made appealable under Section 28 according to the law for the time being in force, i. e., the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code. The decrees would consequently be appealable under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act read with Section 96 C. P. C., and the appeal as against a decree for resitution of conjugal rights under Section 9(1) would be a regular appeal.

The mere fact that the proceeding does not start as a suit under the terms of Section 26 C. P. C. by the presentation of a plaint or in any manner prescribed by the Rules framed under the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code does not affect the question. A similar view was taken by me in S. R. No. 35641 of 1958 in regard to an appeal arising out of proceeding under Section 295 of the Indian Succession Act for the grant of a probate.

2. The reference is answered accordingly.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial