It was the first major social reform legislation after the abolition of Sati by Lord William Bentinck. The sari was required to be of coarse cloth, preferably white. Status: Repealed To protect what it considered family honour and family property, upper-caste Hindu society had long disallowed the remarriage of widows, even child and adolescent ones , all of whom were expected to live a life of austerity and abnegation. Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar was the most prominent campaigner. He petitioned the Legislative council,  but there was a counter petition against the proposal with nearly four times more signatures by Radhakanta Deb and the Dharma Sabha. Irrevocably, eternally married as a mere child, the death of the husband she had perhaps never known left the wife a widow, an inauspicious being whose sins in a previous life had deprived her of her husband, and her parents-in-law of their son, in this one.
|Published (Last):||25 August 2015|
|PDF File Size:||5.80 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||1.41 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Free for one month and pay only if you like it. According to section 5 of the Act marriage can be solemnised between two Hindus; M. Vijayakumari v. Devabalan, AIR Ker To brand the wife as unfit for marriage and procreation of children on account of the mental disorder, it needs to be established that the ailment suffered by her is of such a kind or such an extent that it is impossible for her to lead a normal married life; R. Lakshmi Narayan v.
Marriage founded on fraud from very inception is a nullity; Sunder Lal Soni v. It was held that the consent was vitiated by fraud; Babui Panmate v. The question of mental cruelty has to be considered in the light of the norms of marital ties of the particular society, to which the parties belong, their social values, status, environment in which they live. Cruelty need not be physical. If from the conduct of the spouse it is established or an inference can be legitimately drawn that the treatment of the spouse is such that it causes apprehension in the mind of the other spouse, about his or her mental welfare then this conduct amounts to cruelty; Maya Devi v.
Husband is entitled to decree of divorce; Sadhana Srivastava v. Intention to be cruel is not an essential element of cruelty as envisaged under section 13 1 ia of the Act. It is sufficient that if the cruelty is of such type that it becomes impossible for spouses to live together; Neelu Kohli v. Panduranga Shet v.
Vijayalaxmi, AIR Karn vi Due to the criminal complaint filed by the wife, the husband remained in jail for 63 days and also his father and brother for 20 to 25 days. Therefore, even though the case of cruelty may not have been proved but as the facts emerging from the record clearly indicate that the living of the two as husband and wife would not only be difficult but impossible, the court has no alternative but to grant a decree of divorce; Poonam Gupta v.
Sundar, AIR Kar Such an attitude is cruelty in itself on the part of the husband; Yudhishter Singh v. Sarita, AIR Raj Hanumantha Rao v. In this transitional period the parties or either of them may have second thoughts; Suman v. It has no reference to the place of living.
The parties may live under the same roof and yet they may not be living as husband and wife. The parties should have no desire to perform marital obligations; Sureshta Devi v. Mutual consent should continue till the divorce decree is passed. The court should be satisfied about the bona fides and consent of the parties. If there is no consent at the time of enquiry the court gets no jurisdiction to make a decree for divorce. If the court is held to have the power to make a decree solely based on the initial petition, it negates the whole idea of mutuality.
There can be unilateral withdrawal of consent. Held, that since consent of the wife was obtained by fraud and wife was not willing to consent, there could be unilateral withdrawal, of consent; Sureshta Devi v. The case cannot be transferred to district court on a ground that the husband resides outside the limits of municipal corporation; Arjun Singhal v. It is clear that mere divorce does not end the right to maintenance; Captain, Ramesh Chander v.
Devaki, AIR Mad However, the husband will have to satisfy the court that either due to physical or mental disability he is handicapped to earn and support his livelihood. Held that since the husband was able-bodied and was not mentally ill and only because his business had closed down, he could not be granted any maintenance, it being opposed to spirit of section 24 of the Act; Kanchan v.
Kamalendra, AIR Bom Vijaya Manohar Arbat v. Clause vi omitted by Act 2 of , sec. Sub-section 2 omitted by Act 68 of , sec. Earlier sub-section 1 was amended by Act 72 of , sec. Certain words omitted by Act 68 of , sec. Clauses viii and ix omitted by Act 44 of , sec. Proviso omitted by Act 68 of , sec. Clause a before substitution, stood as under: Clause c omitted by Act 2 of , sec.
हिन्दू विवाह अधिनियम
Free for one month and pay only if you like it. According to section 5 of the Act marriage can be solemnised between two Hindus; M. Vijayakumari v. Devabalan, AIR Ker To brand the wife as unfit for marriage and procreation of children on account of the mental disorder, it needs to be established that the ailment suffered by her is of such a kind or such an extent that it is impossible for her to lead a normal married life; R. Lakshmi Narayan v. Marriage founded on fraud from very inception is a nullity; Sunder Lal Soni v.
Hindu Marriage Act 1955 (Hindi) हिन्दू विवाह अधिनियम
Nigor In the original Act, the age of valid marriage was fixed at 18 for the boys and 15 for the girls, however this age requirement was later raised to 21 and 18 respectively for the boys and the girls through the Child Marriage Restraint Amendment Hinvu Your Book Shelf Is Empty. Transfer of Property Act, and Indian Easement Also the author has provided specimens of standard forms to enable filing of petition in the Court. According to Hinduism, marriage is a sacred relationship. For queries regarding web order status, dispatch details, suggestions and more: Buddhist, Jains or Sikh and, in fact, applies to all such persons domiciled in the country who are not Muslims, Christians, Parsi or Jew, unless it is proved that such persons are not governed by the Act under any custom or usage. Marriage can be solemnized between two Hindus if neither party has a living spouse at the time of marriage; . Why is it only for the Hindus? Section B of the Hindu Marriage Act provides for the couple seeking divorce through mutual consent to wait for hkndu period of six months after making sdhiniyam joint application for divorce.
Hindu Widows' Remarriage Act, 1856
Tegrel Widest Range of Text Books. Therefore, even though the case of cruelty may not have been proved but as the facts emerging from the record clearly indicate that the living of the two as husband and wife would not only be difficult but impossible, the court has no alternative but to adhkniyam a decree of divorce; Poonam Gupta v. Derrett predicted in his later writings that despite some evidence adhhiniyam modernization, the dominant view in Hindu society for the foreseeable future would remain that marriage is a form of social obligation. An extensive collection of vovah on major legal systems of the world. In the original Act, the age of valid marriage was fixed at 18 for the boys and 15 for the girls, however this age requirement was later raised to 21 and 18 respectively for the boys and the girls through the Child Marriage Restraint Amendment Act Your Book Shelf Is Empty. Beyond Tradition and Modernity.