Legal Reference Library

A single Judge of the Kerala High Court in Lonankutty Antony@ T.V.Antony v The Joint Registrar of Co operative Societies and others [W.P(C )No:2527/2015] has ruled that a banker cannot exercise a general lien over the property owned by the husband, for the liability incurred by the wife, in the absence of any express or implied consent thereto. The petitioner husband had availed himself of a loan from the respondent bank after mortgaging a piece of property and later cleared it. When he sought the return of the title deeds of the property after clearing the loan, the bank refused to return the same. The refusal seemed to be on the premise that the petitioner’s wife also had secured a loan, and the petitioner’s title deeds are deemed to have been kept as security for the realization of the said debt, too. In other words, the bank had exercised its general lien over the property owned by the husband, for the liability incurred by the wife. Justice Dama Seshadri Naidu in his imitable styl...

Bombay High Court: While deciding the appeal preferred against the judgement of the Sessions Court, which denied the maintenance granted by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Karad,  M.S. Sonak J. modified the order of the Judicial Magistrate First Class and directed the respondent to pay  maintenance on monthly basis to the applicant with effect from 1 January 2015 thereby setting aside the order of the Sessions Court. In the present case Mr. Sawant, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the evidence on record does establish that the applicant was harassed and therefore compelled to live away from the respondent and the Additional Sessions Judge exceeded the bounds of revisional jurisdiction in interfering with the well reasoned decision of the Judicial Magistrate First Class. On the contrary counsel for the respondent Ms. Bhosale submitted that the Additional Sessions Judge, upon proper appreciation of the material on record has rightly held that the Applicant...

Bombay High Court has held that if a wife files false criminal case against the husband and his family members in which the husband and his family members ultimately gets acquitted, it amounts to cruelty. Justice R.D Dhanuka said that on this very ground, the Husband is entitled to seek divorce from the wife. Background In this case, the wife filed a complaint against Husband and his family under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code. The Husband filed petition for divorce. After conducting trial, the case lodged by the wife resulted in acquittal in 2007. Meanwhile Husband got his Divorce petition allowed in 2008. The state preferred appeal against the acquittal and the wife preferred appeal against grant of Divorce. The former was dismissed and the latter was allowed and Divorce decree was set aside by the appellate court. The acquittals were not further challenged. Husband preferred appeal against the setting aside of Divorce decree by the Lower appellate court. Issue The Substantial que...

Just because a man earns a high salary, it does not mean that the family is not dependent on a wife's salary, the Bombay high court has ruled. A division bench of Justices Abhay Oka and Revati Dere directed New India Assurance to pay around Rs 47 lakh in compensation along with 7% interest to Sangli resident Sunil Garud (52) and his two young sons for the death of his wife in a car accident. The insurance company had opposed the claim as the husband, a government servant, was earning more than his wife, a professor in an engineering college, and therefore he was not dependent on her earnings. The HC said the company's contention that the husband of the deceased was earning and was not dependent on his wife's income, could not be accepted. "In this day and age, considering the cost of living, the income of both husband and wife are equally important for running the house as they supplement each other's income. It cannot be generally said that as the surviving sp...

A woman doesn't have a claim to her partner's home over that of his wife, the Delhi high court has said in an important ruling on legal rights in a live-in relationship. Justice Najmi Waziri on Tuesday came to the rescue of a 78-year-old widow, a US citizen, by restoring to her possession of a Greater Kailash property owned by her husband. The senior citizen, who now lives in the US, married an Indian businessman in 1963 and was forced to move court when she was ousted from her matrimonial home following her husband's death last year. "A live-in or mistress or survivor in a bigamous relationship does not enjoy the status of marriage, hence she does not get the protection of law for maintenance," Justice Waziri said referring to Supreme Court rulings. The court made it clear that the US citizen, being the legally wedded wife of the businessman, had a better claim to his property over that of the live in partner. MARGUERITE CHAWLA ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Pe...

Looking at the burden on the husband to provide maintenance to his wife even in cases where the wife is well educated and capable enough to earn for her living, a bench of S.A. Morey J gave a landmark judgment in favour of husband to curb the misuse of the provision of maintenance, and held that a wife who is well qualified and is capable to earn cannot sit idle and claim maintenance from her husband. In the instant case, petitioner-wife moved an application before this Court for grant of maintenance from the respondent-husband during the pendency of petition under Section 125 CrPC. The petitioner alleged that she was forced to live separately as the respondent and his family members ill-treated and harassed her for bringing less dowry. The petitioner contended that the respondent is a successful businessman and is doing business not only in India but also in Dubai and other countries, and that his total income per month is more than Rs. 15 lakhs, and therefore considering the status ...