Advanced Search Results

Monika Sanctis Vs. Henry Joseph and anr.

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Family

Acts : Divorce Act, 1869 - Sections 10, 14, 16 and 17; Family Courts Act, 1984 - Sections 19

Reported in : ILR2004KAR2081; 2003(2)KarLJ588

them of the procedural hurdles which had been found in the principal act with its Colonial background.; (B) INDIAN DIVORCE (AMENDMENT ACT), 2001 -SECTION 16 - Applicability of - HELD - That a decree for dissolution of a marriage passed under the … matter stood thus, she had received a letter on 15-1-1998 from one Vincent Nazarat (marked as Ex. P. 6) and she was informed that her husband was living in adultery with the said Nazarat's wife and that

John Vincent Versu Nancy

Court : Chennai

Subject : Land Acquisition

of Grounds of Civil Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 55 of the Divorce Act, 1869, as amended by the Indian Divorce (Amendment) Act, 2001 Act 51 of 2001, against the order and decretal order dated 19.04.2011 made in I.D.O.P.No.140 of 2006 on … 23.8.1998 at St.Antony's Church, Avadi, Chennai and out of the wedlock, two female children, namely, Anie John, aged 6 years, and Patricia, aged 3 years, were born. In the meanwhile, the appellant was transferred to Madhya Pradesh

Mrs. Larley Vs. John @ Johny C.A.

Court : Patna

Subject : Family

Acts : Divorce Act, 1869 - Sections 18, 19 and 20; Divorce (Amendment) Act, 2001

of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (the Act' for short). Section 20 as it stood prior to the Indian Divorce (Amendment) Act, 2001 (Act 50 of 2001) provided that every decree or nullity of marriage made by District Judge shall be

Mrs. Larley Vs. Mr. John @ Jony C.A.

Court : Patna

Subject : Family

Acts : Indian Divorce Act, 1869 - Sections 17, 18, 19 and 20; Indian Divorce (Amendment) Act, 2001 - Sections 1(2); Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 366

of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869, ('the Act' for short). Section 20 as it stood prior to the Indian Divorce (Amendment) Act, 2001 (Act 50 of 2001) provided that every decree of nullity of marriage made by District Judge shall be

Rosy Kurian Kannanaikal Vs. Joseph Verghese Cheeran

Court : Karnataka

Subject : FamilyCivil

Acts : Divorce Act, 1869 - Sections 10, 10A, 14, 16, 17, 19 and 20; ;Family Courts Act, 1984 - Sections 19 and 19(1); Divorce (Amendment) Act, 2001- Sections 29 and 55

Reported in : II(2002)DMC79; ILR2002KAR1831; 2004(3)KarLJ75

the parties to a marriage together, whether such marriage was solemnized before or after the commencement of the Indian Divorce (Amendment) Act, 2001, on the ground that they have been living separately for a period of two years or more, that … book as completely as if it had never been passed. To this Rule, an exception is provided by Section 6 of the General Clauses Act and so in the absence of any provision giving it retrospective operation, the

Thomas K. Varghese Vs. the Family Court

Court : Kerala

Subject : Family

Acts : Divorce Act, 1869 - Sections 3(3); Divorce (Amendment) Act, 2001

Reported in : I(2005)DMC495; 2004(3)KLT1036

has territorial jurisdiction to entertain O.P. (I.D.A.) No. 942 of 1997 and also for a declaration that the Indian Divorce (Amendment) Act, 2001 is not applicable to O.P. (I.D.A.) No. 942 of 1997. He also prayed for a direction to the … respondent has territorial jurisdiction to entertain O.P. (I.D.A.) No. 942 of 1997 in view of the amendment to Section 3(3) of the Divorce Act, 1869 by Act No. 51 of 2001. Though the first respondent found that … J.1. This Writ Appeal is filed against the Judgment in O.P. No. 6500 of 2002 which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge. The appellant

Linish P. Mathew Vs. Mruthula Mathew

Court : Kerala

Subject : Education

the Divorce Act. That question was argued in detail by the counsel. 6. Before the amendment by the Indian Divorce (Amendment) Act 2001 (Act 51 of 2001), the title of the Act was "The Indian Divorce Act". The word "Indian" was … 1, 2, 3 and 4, shall, mutatis mutandis apply to such decree." By the Amendment Act 51 of 2001, Section 20 was omitted. Before the amendment by Act 51 of 2001, a decree for dissolution of marriage passed

Kuruvilla Varghese Vs. Sapnam Elizabeth Joseph

Court : Kerala

Subject : Family

Acts : Divorce Act, 1869 - Sections 10, 10(1), 14 and 16; Indian Divorce (Amendment) Act, 2001; Hindu Marriage Act - Sections 23(1)

Reported in : AIR2007Ker240

matters matrimonial; it is hereby enacted as follows.' Cardinal changes were brought about in the Act by the Indian Divorce (Amendment) Act, 2001. Section 10 of the Act, before the Amendment Act of 2001, was as follows:10. When husband may petition for … Twelve years of my precious life has been wasted. If he had agreed to nullify the marriage within 6 days of marriage, my folk would have got me married within six months. Since the petitioner wanted me

Sherly Thomas Vs. Johny

Court : Kerala

Subject : Family

Acts : Divorce , 1869 - Sections 8, 10, 10A, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20; Hindu Marriage Act - Sections 13 and 13B

Reported in : I(2002)DMC703

theside of the respondents. Documents were also produced and got marked on bothsides. After the amendment to the Indian Divorce Act which had come into effectw.e.f. 3.10.2001, the petitioner and the 1st respondent filed C.M.P. 53500/2001, a jointpetition … 10-A of the Divorce Act for dissolution of marriage on mutual consent. 6. The learned counsel for both the parties submitted that the provision fordissolution … R. Rajendra Babu, J. 1. The important question for consideration is whether a joint petition under Section 10Aof the Divorce Act can be entertained before the High Court in a pending case filedby one of

Saumya Ann Thomas Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Kerala

Subject : Family

Acts : Divorce Act, 1869 - Section 10A, 10A(1) and 10A(2); ;Indian Divorce (Amendment) Act, 2001; ;Hindu Marriage Act - Section 13B and 13B(1); ;Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act - Section 32B and 32B(1); ;Special Marriage Act, 1954 - Section 28, 28(1) and 28(2); ;Hindu Law; ;Constitution of India - Articles 13, 13(1), 14, 21, 44, 142 and 372; ;Code of Civil Procedure (CPC)

Reported in : 2010(1)KLT869

the parties to a marriage together, whether such marriage was solemnised before or after the commencement of the Indian Divorce (Amendment) Act, 2001, on the ground that they have been living separately for a period of two years or more, that … Is the stipulation of a period of two years as the minimum mandatory period of separate residence in Section 10A(1) of the Divorce Act right, just and fair? Is it arbitrary, fanciful and oppressive? Does that stipulation … are spouses. They are Christians by faith. Their marriage was solemnized on 6.4.08 in accordance with Christian religious rites. Differences and disagreements arose instantly after