This tag is associated with 6 posts

Section 498-A of the IPC could be made compoundable, – a complaint under Section 498-A of the IPC presents difficulty because the said offence is not compoundable except in the State of Andhra Pradesh where by a State amendment, it has been made compoundable. – We, therefore, feel that though offence punishable under Section 498-A of the IPC is not compoundable, in appropriate cases if the parties are willing and if it appears to the criminal court that there exist elements of settlement, it should direct the parties to explore the possibility of settlement through mediation. – No uniform standard can ever be laid down for guidance, yet we deem it appropriate to enumerate some instances of human behaviour which may be relevant in dealing with the cases of “mental cruelty”. The instances indicated in the succeeding paragraphs are only illustrative and not exhaustive: (i) On consideration of complete matrimonial life of the parties, acute mental pain, agony and suffering as would not make possible for the parties to live with each other could come within the broad parameters of mental cruelty. (ii) On comprehensive appraisal of the entire matrimonial life of the parties, it becomes abundantly clear that situation is such that the 10Page 11 wronged party cannot reasonably be asked to put up with such conduct and continue to live with other party. (iii) xxx xxx xxx (iv) Mental cruelty is a state of mind. The feeling of deep anguish, disappointment, frustration in one spouse caused by the conduct of other for a long time may lead to mental cruelty. (v) A sustained course of abusive and humiliating treatment calculated to torture, discommode or render miserable life of the spouse. (vi) Sustained unjustifiable conduct and behaviour of one spouse actually affecting physical and mental health of the other spouse. The treatment complained of and the resultant danger or apprehension must be very grave, substantial and weighty. (vii) xxx xxx xxx (viii) xxx xxx xxx (ix) xxx xxx xxx (x) The married life should be reviewed as a whole and a few isolated instances over a period of years will not amount to cruelty. The ill conduct must be persistent for a fairly lengthy period, where the relationship has deteriorated to an extent that because of the acts and behaviour of a spouse, the wronged party finds it extremely difficult to live with the other party any longer, may amount to mental cruelty. 11Page 12 (xi) xxx xxx xxx (xii) xxx xxx xxx (xiii) xxx xxx xxx (xiv) Where there has been a long period of continuous separation, it may fairly be concluded that the matrimonial bond is beyond repair. The marriage becomes a fiction though supported by a legal tie. By refusing to sever that tie, the law in such cases, does not serve the sanctity of marriage; on the contrary, it shows scant regard for the feelings and emotions of the parties. In such like situations, it may lead to mental cruelty.” It is pertinent to note that in this case the husband and wife had lived separately for more than sixteen and a half years. This fact was taken into consideration along with other facts as leading to the conclusion that matrimonial bond had been ruptured beyond repair because of the mental cruelty caused by the wife. – directions, which the courts dealing with the matrimonial matters shall follow: (a) In terms of Section 9 of the Family Courts Act, the Family Courts shall make all efforts to settle the matrimonial disputes through mediation. Even if the 36Page 37 Counsellors submit a failure report, the Family Courts shall, with the consent of the parties, refer the matter to the mediation centre. In such a case, however, the Family Courts shall set a reasonable time limit for mediation centres to complete the process of mediation because otherwise the resolution of the disputes by the Family Court may get delayed. In a given case, if there is good chance of settlement, the Family Court in its discretion, can always extend the time limit. (b) The criminal courts dealing with the complaint under Section 498-A of the IPC should, at any stage and particularly, before they take up the complaint for hearing, refer the parties to mediation centre if they feel that there exist elements of settlement and both the parties are willing. However, they should take care to see that in this exercise, rigour, purport and efficacy of Section 498-A of the IPC is not diluted. Needless to say that the discretion to grant or not to 37Page 38 grant bail is not in any way curtailed by this direction. It will be for the concerned court to work out the modalities taking into consideration the facts of each case. (c) All mediation centres shall set up pre-litigation desks/clinics; give them wide publicity and make efforts to settle matrimonial disputes at pre-litigation stage. 37. The appeal is disposed of in the aforestated terms.

Page 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1794 OF 2013 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 4782 of 2007) K. SRINIVAS RAO … APPELLANT Versus D.A. DEEPA … RESPONDENT JUDGMENT (SMT.) RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal, by special leave, has been … Continue reading

or.21, rule 102 of c.p.c ?= the power of the General Power of Attorney agent =“The mortgages executed by the agent were valid and binding on the appellant. The consideration that it was very unreasonable to expect that the appellant should inform the whole world that she had cancelled the power of attorney given to the person, was not relevant in the face of the clear words of the Section 208 of the Contract Act. The policy of the law, apparently in the interests of trade and commerce, is that the agent’s action should bind the principal, even though the principal might have cancelled the agent’s authority unless the third person with whom the agent enters into contracts knew of the termination of the agency.”

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S. APPA RAO   C.C.C.A.Nos.111 and 113 of 2011 COMMON ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.S. Appa Rao)         These appeals are filed against the orders, dated  25-03-2011 passed in E.A.Nos.59 of 2010 and 62 of 2010 respectively in E.P.No.39 of 2008 in O.S.No.108 of 2007 on the … Continue reading

rail way accident claim =Respondents/applicants are the wife, son and three daughters of the deceased. On 13.08.2001, when the deceased was travelling by train No.7405 Krishna Express from Chirala to Vijayawada, while standing near the door on account of heavy crowd, due to the jerks of the train, he slipped, fell down and died. The ticket was missing in that incident.

                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD                         PRESENT                         THE HON‘BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU C.M.A.No.363 of 2010.            Date:23.08.2011   Between:- The Union of India, represented by its General Manager, South Central Railway, Secunderabad.       ..Appellant/Respondent And P.Lakshmi Sarojini and others      .. Respondents/Applicants JUDGMENT:- … Continue reading

mere filing of criminal case does not amount to treating the petitioner with cruelty unless it is substantiated that it was filed with false allegations to harass the petitioners about which there is no evidence. On the other hand, if the allegations made in the Criminal case are true it amounts to that the petitioner treated the respondent with cruelty.

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHANREDDY   FAMILY COURT APPEAL No.56 OF 2011 JUDGEMENT :(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice. G. Krishna Mohan Reddy)  This Family Court Appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act is directed against order of dismissal dated 24-01-2011, passed in O.P. No.284 of … Continue reading

suit for damages and eviction=1) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to an order of eviction against the defendants as prayed? 2) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to suit claim of Rs.12,00,000/- as prayed? 3) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the mesne profits @ Rs.1,00,000/- as prayed? 4) To what relief?= The evidence of PW 1 would go to show that the appellant – defendant No.1 entered into lease agreement with the first respondent – plaintiff on 18-08-1967 for a period of about 20 years and later it was extended for another period of 20 years which came to an end by 31-03-2007. Ex.A-1 is the letter addressed by the plaintiff to the first defendant to vacate the premises. It is admitted by her that though request was made by the appellant to extend the lease period for another 30 years, she refused to do so. Practically, the evidence of PW 1 remained unchallenged. DW 1 who is examined on behalf of the defendant No.1 stated that when the lease period expired, the company made a request to the plaintiff to extend the lease period for another 30 years. He also admitted that they intended to vacate the premises as soon as they secure a suitable accommodation. For that purpose, the appellant also identified some sites for retail outlet of the petrol bunk, but that was not materialised. So from the evidence on record, it is clear that the lease period expired by 31-03-2007. Further, a specific plea has been taken in the written statement that the appellant would require six months or one year time to vacate the premises to enable it to secure a suitable alternative site. That period is also over. Therefore, considering the evidence on record, the trial Court rightly decreed the suit directing the defendants to vacate and deliver vacant possession of the schedule property to the plaintiff, and it requires no interference by this Court. Insofar as awarding of damages for use and occupation after expiry of the lease period is concerned, the respondent – plaintiff claimed damages at the rate of Rs.1,00,000/- per month. There was a rapid growth in that area because of starting of international airport and sharp rise of rents in and around the plaint schedule premises. Considering these aspects, the trial Court rightly granted Rs.25,000/- per month towards damages for use and occupation. Considering the locality of the outlet and considerable increase of rents in that area, granting of Rs.25,000/- per month towards damages for use and occupation cannot be said to be on higher side or unreasonable. There are no grounds to interfere with the judgment and decree of the trial Court. 9. The appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed confirming the judgment and decree dated 30-04-2011 in O.S No.904 of 2008 on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar. In the circumstances of the case, no order as to costs. 10. In view of the fact that for the last 40 years, the appellant is running a retail outlet petrol bunk, a reasonable time can be granted to enable it to secure alternative accommodation for the purpose of starting retail outlet. Accordingly, the appellant is granted time to vacate the premises till 31-12-2011.

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU A.S No. 362 OF 2011 Date: 24-08-2011   Between Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, rep., by its Territory Manager and Authorised Signatory, Hyderabad Retail Territory, P.B.No.04,, H.C.L., Cherlapalli, now at Tadbund, Secunderabad …..Appellant And Smt. Hashimunnisa Begum and another …..Respondents                     … Continue reading

. New facts must be specially pleaded.- The defendant must raise by his pleading all matters which show the suit not to be maintainable, or that the transaction is either void or voidable in point of law, and all such grounds of defence as, if not raised, would be likely to take the opposite party by surprise, or would raise issues of fact not arising out of the plaint, as, for instance, fraud, limitation, release, payment, performance, or facts showing illegality.=mere acceptance of rent for period subsequent to expiry of lease period during which lessee continued to occupy lease premises cannot be said to be a conduct signifying “assent” to continuance of lease even after expiry of lease period.

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR Second Appeal No. 511 of 2008 23-03-2011 K.Sajjan Raj Gopisetty Chandramouli Counsel for Appellant : Sri B.V. Bakshi Counsel for respondent :Sri R. Chandrashekar Reddy :Judgment: This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 03.03.2008 passed in A.S. No.149 of 2006 by the I Additional Chief Judge, … Continue reading

Blog Stats

  • 2,884,448 hits



Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,905 other followers

Follow advocatemmmohan on WordPress.com