Marriage Laws Amendment Act 2001 Section 7 - Judgment Search Results

Smt. Snigdha Chaya Devi Vs. Sri Akhil Chandra Sarma

Court : Guwahati

section 10 of the act which after the amendment by marriage laws amendment act act 68 of 1976 reads judicial separation 10 of the act which after the amendment by marriage laws amendment act act 68 of 1976 reads judicial separation 1 may besought it may be pointed out that prior to amendment in 1976 some of the grounds on which judicial separation act which after the amendment by marriage laws amendment act act 68 of 1976 reads judicial separation 1 either party to and hence could not grant decree for judicial separation u section 13a of the act i e that in a petition own costs 3 the respondent herein had on 20 12 78 filed petition against the appellant u section 13 1 of

Rasala Surya Prakasarao and Others Vs. Rasala Venkateswararao and Othe ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1992AP234; 1992(2)ALT346; II(1992)DMC608

for the appellants contends that s 16 of the hindu marriage act especially after its amendment in 1976 has removed the to section 16 effected by section 19 of the marriage laws amendment act 1976 and observed at page 214 as follows 000 16 of the hindu marriage act especially after its amendment in 1976 has removed the disqualifications attached to illegitimate children judgment clearly indicated that section 16 of the hindu marriage act enacts a complete code with regard to the off spring is margabandhu v kothan darama air1984mad270 his lordship dealing with section 16 1 of the hindu marriage act as amended in para 555 mayne s hindu law 12th edition at pages 772 and 773 courts have gradually construed dasiputra as equal to

Rajendra Agrawal Vs. Smt. Sharda Devi

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1993MP142

court is satisfied that there is no chance of the marriage tie being continued then it would be desirable to dissolve ground under section 13 prior to the amendment by marriage laws amendment act 68 of 1976 stood differently and a spouse under section 13 prior to the amendment by marriage laws amendment act 68 of 1976 stood differently and a spouse seeking based on the ground falling under section 13 of the act dr saroj kumar sen v dr kalyan kanta ray air the finding of trial court with regard to ground under section 12 1 of the act 15 the document ex p1 of her brother mahesh chandra bansal as an attesting witness 7 the respondent to rebut that evidence did not examine her

Preman Vs. Gopalan

Court : Kerala

Reported in : II(1993)DMC147

was intended to be conferred on children born of a marriage which is void under any law prior to the commencement act as it stood before the amendment by the marriage laws amendment act 1976 confers legitimacy on any child begotten or 16 of the act the supreme court observed that the amendment has only enlarged the applicability of the beneficial provisions the prevention and divorce act 1949 section 4 1 of the act reads notwithstanding any rub of law custom or usage to child of a marriage which is null and void under section 11 in other words the section has been made applicable lower appellate court the finding has only to be sustained 7 ld counsel for the appellant has attempted to distinguish the

Basappa Vs. Siddagangamma

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : II(1992)DMC167; ILR1992KAR1798; 1992(2)KarLJ357

as being null and void would not arise since her marriage is non est as in the eye of law and this act is the code governing hindu marriages all other laws and concepts in this behalf in so far as they born before or after the commencement of the marriage laws amendment act 1976 68 of 1976 and whether or not a of a marriage under section 11 of the hindu marriage act the wife claiming maintenance retains her status as wife for character of void and voidable marriages as covered respectively by sections 11 and 12 it is also to be seen that as to harmonise and give effect to the various provisions 7 in the instant case both the courts have arrived at

Smt. Vimlesh W/O Sri Prakash Chand Sharma Vs. Sri Prakash Chand Sharma ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1992All260

s 13 i l a as added by the hindu marriage laws amendment act is that the solitary instance of cruelty 13 i l a as added by the hindu marriage laws amendment act is that the solitary instance of cruelty would under s 13 1x1 a added by hindu marriage law amendment 1976 which was enforced on 27th may 1976 was borrowed as contemplated by s 13 l i a of the act as added by the u p amendment and what should not sufficient to award a decree of divorce ii reconciliation sections 8 and 13 1 i a of hindu marriage act of the code of civil procedure for short the code 7 as regards the first point about the lack of endeavour

Balamma Vs. Srinivas

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : II(1993)DMC133; ILR1993KAR1061

of a marriage under this act and whether or not marriage is held to be void otherwise than on a petition born before or after the commencement of the marriage law amendment act 1976 and whether or not a decree of nullity be availed even in those cases where a guardian is actually in existence with reference to a minor the wordings of to provisions of section 6 of the limitation act ordinarily section 6 of the limitation act which relates to the period the 3rd plaintiff was admitted in the hospital on 1 7 1973 and she delivered a male child on 2 7

Anita Sarwal Vs. Deepak Sarwal

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 46(1992)DLT502; I(1992)DMC420

live together and that they have mutually agreed that the marriage should be dissolved 2 on the motion of both the was solemnized before or after the commencement of the marriage laws amendment act 1976 on the ground that they have been solemnized before or after the commencement of the marriage laws amendment act 1976 on the ground that they have been living also referred to the provision of section 23 of the act for the proposition that where the divorce is sought on is whether the requirement of law as contained in sub section 2 of section 13 b is a matter of mere has not been obtained by force fraud or under influence 7 reference is also made to the unreported judgment of the

Hemantkumar Vinodchandra Sukhadia Vs. Paruben

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : I(1992)DMC614

the petition are true pass decree of divorce declaring the marriage to be dissolved with effect from the date of the was solemnized before or after the commencement of the marriage laws amendment act 1976 on the ground that they have not solemnized before or after the commencement of the marriage laws amendment act 1976 on the ground that they have not been court may make in this behalf all proceedings under this act shall be regulated as may be by the code of of the presentation of the petition referred to in sub section 1 and not later than eighteen months after the said objections as per ex 10 against the said application ex 7 6 in view of the aforesaid developments in the course

Soldal Vs. Cook County

Court : US Supreme Court

illinois state court under the illinois forcible entry and detainer act ill rev stat ch 110 9 101 et seq 1991 any rights privileges or immunities secured by the constitution and laws shall be liable to the party injured in an action below and this court s cases unmistakably hold that the amendment protects property even where privacy or liberty is not implicated charges could be brought because under illinois law a criminal action cannot be used to determine the right of possession see at the dominant character of the conduct challenged in a section 1983 case to determine the constitutional standard under which it 463 469 1985 texas v brown 460 u s 730 747 748 1983 stevens j concurring in judgment united states v