N. RAJENDRAN V. S. VALLI

COURT: Madras High Court

CORAM: K.M. Joseph, J. Hrishikesh Roy, J.

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 3 February 2022.

FACTS

In this instance, the HC overturned a couple’s decision to dissolve their marriage. The husband’s petition for divorce based on cruelty had previously been approved by the Family Court. The aggrieved appellant married the respondent in accordance with Hindu laws and ceremonies, as well as appropriate customs. And, according to the appellant, there were some disagreements between his sister and the respondent’s brother, who were allegedly married, which eventually led to the appellant’s sister returning to her parents’ home. She was apprehensive to return to her husband’s home and accused them of maltreatment, so on March 3, 2001, she filed a divorce petition seeking to dissolve the marriage. Following that, on July 23, 2004, the family court granted the petition. As a result, the respondent filed an appeal with the Madras High Court on September 9, 2004, under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984.

Aggrieved by the order of the HC, the appellants filed the present appeal.

ISSUES RAISED

Whether the period spent for obtaining a certified copy of the decree can be exhausted from the limitation period?

Whether Section 12 of the Limitation Act, which excludes time spent for obtaining a certified copy of the decree from the limitation period, will apply to a matrimonial appeal?

JUDGEMENT

The Hon’ble Supreme Court stated that the appellant’s arguments for reversing the family court’s decision lack validity. Similarly, the Hon’ble Supreme Court noted that the petition was filed less than two years after the marriage. Brutality can take many different forms, including both physical and emotional abuse. It’s a question that has to be answered based on the specific facts of each case. We are convinced, however, that the appellant’s argument was without value by any standard. The Hon’ble Court further held that the High Court.

Similar Posts