1	Chand Patel Vs. Bismillah Begum & Anr	Coram: ALTAMAS KABIR, J.M.PANCHAL	14/03/2008	Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - s.125 - Maintenance - Second marriage by muslim with his wife's sister while his earlier marriage with other sister still subsisting - Daughter born out of this wedlock - Claim for maintenance by second wife and her	Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. Though the factum of marriage between them was denied by the appellant, the courts below negated the appellant's case and proceeded on the basis that a marriage had been performed between them. If the marr	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
2	JAGDISH SINGH Vs. MADHURI DEVI	Coram: C.K. THAKKER, D.K. JAIN	28/04/2008	Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - s.13 - Divorce - Husband filed divorce petition on grounds of desertion and cruelty - Family Court decided both issues in favour of husband and passed decree of divorce - High Court reversed the decree - Challenge to - Held	Allowing the appeal and remanding the matter to High Court for expeditious disposal in accordance with law, the Court HELD: 1. The High Court was not right in setting aside finding of facts recorded by the Family Court without recording reasons fo	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
3	M.Saravana Porselvi Vs. A.R. Chandrashekar @ Parthiban & Ors.	Coram: S.B. Sinha , Lokeshwar Singh Panta	27/05/2008	Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: ss.482 and 468 - Customary divorce - Agreement for, registered - Permanent alimony to wife - Ten years thereafter, wife filed complaint petition against husband and parents-in-law before the Women Cell on the grou	Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. The customary divorce may be legal or illegal. The fact that such an agreement had been entered into or the Appellant had received a sum of Rs.25,000/- by way of permanent alimony, however, stands admitt	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
4	SATISH SITOLE Vs. GANGA	Coram: ALTAMAS KABIR, AFTAB ALAM	10/07/2008	Constitution of India, 1950: Articles 136 and 142 - Complete justice - Final settlement of matrimonial dispute - Marriage of parties having irretrievably broken down - All efforts of reconciliation having failed - Parties living separately for 14	Disposing of the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1 Despite the attempts at reconciliation the Gordian knot could not be untied and clearly the marriage has broken down irretrievably. [para 7] [771-C] 1.2 Since the marriage between the parties is dead	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
5	PRIYA VRAT SINGH & ORS Vs. SHYAM JI SAHAI	Coram: ARIJIT PASAYAT, P. SATHASIVAM	05/08/2008	Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - s. 482 - Inherent powers of High Court - Criminal proceedings against husband u/s 494, 120 B and s. 109 IPC and s. 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - Appeal u/s 482 for quashing criminal proceedings - Set	Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. The powers possessed by the High Court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 are very wide and the very plenitude of the power requires great caution in its exercise. The Court must be ca	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
6	DURGESH SHARMA Vs. JAYSHREE	Coram: C.K. THAKKER, D.K. JAIN	26/09/2008	Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: s. 23 and s. 25 (as substituted by Act 104 of 1976) r/w ss. 22 and 24 - High Court, in purported exercise of its power u/s 23(3), transferring a case pending in a court subordinate to it, to a court subordinate to an	Disposing of the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1 A High Court has no power, authority or jurisdiction to transfer a case, appeal or other proceedings pending in a court subordinate to it, to any court subordinate to another High Court in purported exe	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
7	RAJESH BURMANN Vs. MITUL CHATTERJEE (BARMAN)	Coram: C.K. THAKKER, D.K. JAIN	04/11/2008	Maintenance - Medical reimbursement - Claim for, by wife - Entitlement - Held: Wife is entitled to maintenance and support under the 1954 Act - Expressions `maintenance' and `support' are comprehensive and of wide amplitude and take within their s	Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. Interference is not called for against the order passed by the trial Court and as modified by the High Court. So far as maintainability of application filed by the wife is concerned, there is no substanc	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
8	SUMAN KAPUR Vs. SUDHIR KAPUR	Coram: C.K. THAKKER, D.K. JAIN	07/11/2008	Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - s. 13 (1) (ia) - Divorce sought by husband - On the ground of mental cruelty - Decreed by courts below - Wife alleging that the husband remarried a third party before expiry of period of limitation for filing SLP - Held:	Disposing of the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. It cannot be said that by recording a finding as to mental cruelty by the wife against the husband, the Courts below had committed any illegality. Sub-section (1) of Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
9	GAURAV NAGPAL Vs. SUMEDHA NAGPAL	Coram: ARIJIT PASAYAT, G.S. SINGHVI	19/11/2008	Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 / Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 - ss.6 and 13/ ss.8, 17 and 25 - Custody of minor child - Criteria for consideration of - Held: For determining as to who should be given custody of the minor child, paramou	Dismissing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1. In determining the question as to who should be given custody of a minor child, the paramount consideration is the 'welfare of the child' and not rights of the parents under a statute for the time bei	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
10	GULLIPILLI SOWRIA RAJ Vs. BANDARU PAVANI @ GULLIPILI PAVANI	Coram: ALTAMAS KABIR, AFTAB ALAM	04/12/2008	Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Preamble, ss.2, 5, 7, 8 and 12(1)(c) - Marriage between a Hindu and a Christian - Validity of - Held: A marriage between a Hindu and Christian solemnized according to Hindu customs is a nullity - Registration of such mar	Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1. A marriage entered into by a Hindu with a Christian is not valid under the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The Preamble of the Act, indicates that it was enacted to codify the law relating	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgemen