Skip to content


Marriage Laws Amendment Act 2001 Section 7 - Judgment Search Results

Home > Cases Phrase: marriage laws amendment act 2001 section 7 Year: 1978 Page 1 of about 427 results (1.855 seconds)
Oct 16 1978 (HC)

J.P. Sharma Vs. Shasffi Bala

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Oct-16-1978

Reported in : ILR1979Delhi288

amended section 10 reads 10 1 either party to a marriage whether solemnized before or after the commencement of this act costs hindu marriage act 1955 section 13 as amended marriage laws amendment act 1976 section 39 divorce petition for cruelty unsoundness in any court at the commencement of the marriage laws amendment act 1976 shall be dealt with and decided by such section 13 1 iii of the act as amended by act no 68 of 1976 5 during the pendency of the in terms of clause ia of sub section 1 of section 13 of the amended act 17 it is contended by or not it requires or is susceptible to medical treatments 7 section 39 of the amending act made a special provision

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Jan 19 1978 (HC)

Upendra Kumar Vs. Harpriya Kumar

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Jan-19-1978

Reported in : ILR1978Delhi97

been specially created in case of hindumarriages by the hindu marriage act special rights call for specialremedies the legislature has provided depending on the pecuniaryand territorial jurisdictions provided by the various laws in this behalf that in the present case the principal hindu marriage act 1955 has been amendedby the marriage laws amendment act 68 of 1976 and the sectionnow reads as under than one at the time of commencement of the suit actuallyand voluntarily resides or carries on business or personally works for all the courtseems to have missed the last line of section 3 b of the hindumarriage act while comparing it with by r v armitage 1872 l r 7 q b 773 in that case there was a statutory provision that justices

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Jul 17 1978 (HC)

Ch. Krishnama Naidu Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-17-1978

Reported in : AIR1979AP18

that marriage under this act and whether or not the marriage is held to be void otherwise than on a petition child born before or after the commencement of the marriage laws amendment act 1976 and whether or not a decree of of hindu marriage act section 16 1 of hindu marriage amendment act 1976 and section 11 of parent act plaintiff contended question is whether under section 4 a of the ceiling act the area of the parents has to be increased by section 16 1 of hindu marriage amendment act 1976 and section 11 of parent act plaintiff contended that there was no act which was introduced by the amended act 68 of 76 confers legitimacy on such children and the same reads follows

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Jul 24 1978 (HC)

Raj Bala Vs. Pramod Kumar

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Jul-24-1978

Reported in : 15(1979)DLT153

if it is a petition or proceeding under the hindu marriage act then so far as may be as if it while the petition was pending the parliament passed the marriage laws amendment act 1976 amendment act which came into force on the hindu marriage act of 1955 section 39 of the amendment act provides special provisions as to pending cases 1 all it had been originally instituted therein under the special marriage act as amended by this act 2 in every petition or 90 days of the decree as was the law under section 28 of the act 1955 prior to the amendment act invited me to follow those rulings and condone the delay 7 i regret my inability to agree with him under the

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

May 02 1978 (HC)

Kantibai Vs. Kamal Singh Thakur

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : May-02-1978

Reported in : AIR1978MP245; 1978MPLJ633

strong and peremptory than section 28 4 of the hindu marriage act with which we are concerned the hindu marriage act 1955 as amended by the marriage laws amendment act 1976 act no 68 of 1976 will be section 28 of the hindu marriage act as introduced by amendment act no 68 of 1976 reads as under 28 appeal have been made by the marriage laws amendment act 1976 act no 68 of 1976 with that end in view that election petition under section 81 it should equally apply to sections 82 and 117 because under section 86 the high court the penalty of the petition being dismissed at p 493 7 the decision in hukumdev s case air 1974 sc 480

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Oct 03 1978 (HC)

Gurcharan Singh Vs. Sukhdev Kaur

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Oct-03-1978

Reported in : AIR1979P& H98

restitution of conjugal rights as between the parties to the marriage for a period of two years or upwards after the ground for divorce only in the amended act the marriage laws amendment act 1976 cruelty was not a ground for divorce for divorce only in the amended act the marriage laws amendment act 1976 cruelty was not a ground for divorce under added as a ground for divorce only in the amended act the marriage laws amendment act 1976 cruelty was not a it is well settled that the definition of judgment in section 2 9 of c p c is much wider and gone through the record of the case with hie help 7 the appellant as stated earner has reiterated the allegations made

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Apr 04 1978 (HC)

Prakash Wati Vs. P.C. Verma

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Apr-04-1978

Reported in : 14(1978)DLT163

on may 27 1976 the act was amended by the marriage laws amendment act in consequence the respondent moved on application august 1975 secondly reading section 39 2 of the marriage laws amendment act it is obvious that the application under section in the act by section 39 of the marriage laws amendment act which was enacted in 1976 obviously the application for of the act to one under section 13 of the act section 39 2 of the marriage laws amendment act postulates the act to one under section 13 of the act section 39 2 of the marriage laws amendment act postulates two the act filed on september 6 1976 would be premature 7 in my opinion there is no cognet evidersce on record

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Jul 10 1978 (HC)

Sm. Bijoli Choudhury Vs. Sukomal Choudhury

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Jul-10-1978

Reported in : AIR1979Cal87

learned author cruelty which is a ground for dissolution of marriage may be de fined as wilful and unjustifiable conduct of court alipore during the pendency of this appeal the marriage laws amendment act 1976 was enacted which inter alia made several amendment act 1976 was enacted which inter alia made several amendments in the hindu marriage act 1953 the respondent husband has which inter alia made several amendments in the hindu marriage act 1953 the respondent husband has filed an application in this the respondent husband in paragraph 6 of his petition under section 10 of the hindu marriage act had claimed that the for the respondent relied upon a passage occurring at page 77 of tolstoy s the law and practice of divorce and

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Oct 13 1978 (HC)

Smt. A.P. Marry Vs. K.G. Raghawan

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-13-1978

Reported in : AIR1979MP40; 1979MPLJ44

a is as under has after the solemnization of the marriage treated the petitioner with cruelty therefore the requirement of cruelty in hindu marriage act has been amended by the marriage laws amendment act 1976 and section 10 has been deleted and hindu marriage act has been amended by the marriage laws amendment act 1976 and section 10 has been deleted and new would be disinclined to dismiss lightly the so called isolated acts of violence and assault as not amounting to cruelty if has been deleted and new section introduced as per amended section 13 divorce can be obtained on the ground of cruelty she used to go out with him on 11 11 72 the respondent found the appellant with sashi together in model

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Feb 22 1978 (HC)

Suvarna Vs. G.M. Achary

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-22-1978

Reported in : AIR1979AP169

allowed family nullity of marriage section 12 1 of hindu marriage act 1955 and hindu marriage amendment act 1976 appeal filed it need not detain us for long there is an amendment effected to section 12 1 a by amending act 68 says this normally the hymen is ruptured by the first act of coitus though it may persist even after frequent acts detain us for long there is an amendment effected to section 12 1 a by amending act 68 of 76 by to section 12 1 a by amending act 68 of 76 by virtue of which cl a of s 12 1

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //