LAW OFFICE ONLINE

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955; S. 13B ------ Out of marital dispute the wife filed case under section 406/498A IPC and also under the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence 2005 ----- Later both the parties entered into compromise, husband paid Rs.5 lakhs to the wife towards Alimony, and filed Petition for Mutual Divorce ----- After six months of filing the wife remained absent, then on 11.03.2008 filed application for exemption from appearance on 12.03.2008 and later filed application that she does not want to proceed with the Mutual Divorce Case ----- Trial Court dismissed the petition for Mutual Divorce ----- Appeal thereagainst ----- Held: Court is fully satisfied that the consent given by both the parties for obtaining the decree of divorce by mutual consent was free and fair consent and was not obtained by force, fraud or undue influence ----- Court is further satisfied that the alleged withdrawal of the consent by the respondent wife in the first instance on 29/5/2008 was not genuine and was merely with a view to extort more money from the appellant husband ----- the application for exemption from her appearance on 12.03.2008 should be treated as her consent for mutual divorce ----- nothing prevented the court below to proceed to pass divorce decree by mutual consent on 12.03.2008 ------ Appeal allowed ----- Divorce Decree by mutual consent has been granted.

Evidence Act, 1872; S. 27 – Confessional statement -- Applicable only if the confessional statement leads to the discovery of some new fact – The material objects which the police is claimed to have recovered from the accused may well have been planted by the police, the bench said -- the settled legal proposition that Section 27 of the Evidence Act is applicable only if the confessional statement leads to the discovery of some new fact while setting aside the conviction in a murder case

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955; S. 26 – Whether earning mother has any liability towards maintenance of the child -- As much the obligation of the father to maintain a minor child as that of the mother -- It is not the law that how affluent mother may be it is the obligation only of the father to maintain the minor.

Consumer Protection Act, 1986-Ss. 11 (1), 21 (a) (i), 17 (1) (a) (i) and 24A –

Allotment-Complainants applied for-Payments in installments-Terms and conditions of allotment-It is the case of complainants that respective date of possession have long expired but opposite party has failed to complete construction and deliver possession of respective apartments to complainant-Pecuniary jurisdiction-Interest claimed by apartment buyer is in nature of compensation-Held case should be dealt with under Clause 4 (e) of subject Builder Buyer Agreement, which provides that if opposite party is not in a position to offer possession of apartment to allottee, opposite party shall refund consideration amount received with 10% p.a.-Opposite party is liable to refund money received from the complainants with 10% p.a. on amount w.e.f. dates of respective payments of installments-Directions issued-Complaint allowed.

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; S. 125- Maintenance claim by wife ----- Entitlement if Divorce decree has been passed in favour of husband on the ground of cruelty ------ A Divorce was passed in favour of the husband not only on the ground of cruelty and desertion but also on the ground of wife living in adultery. It was held that so far as the liability of the husband for the payment not only of the future maintenance but even in regard to the arrear of maintenance was concerned, the husband would not be liable to pay the same;

Practice and Procedure – Order obtained by fraud – Suppression of execution of two deeds before the Court – Held: Non-production and even non-mentioning of the release deed at the trial is tantamount to playing fraud on the court -- A litigant, who approaches the court, is bound to produce all the documents executed by him which are relevant to the litigation -- If he withholds a vital document in order to gain advantage on the other side then he would be guilty of playing fraud on the court as well as on the opposite party – Order so obtained set aside.

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; O. 7 R. 11 (d) -- Rejection of Plaint -- the has to be read as a whole -- The defence available to the defendants or the plea taken by them in the written statement or any application filed by them, cannot be the basis to decide the application under Order VII Rule 11(d) -- Only the averments in the plaint are germane -- The issue regarding the suit being barred by limitation in the facts of the present case, is a triable issue and for which reason the plaint cannot be rejected at the threshold in exercise of the power under Order VII Rule 11(d).

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; S. 439 ----- Application for Bail to Session Court or High Court without filing application before the Magistrate ---
-- If maintainable ----- Held: that there are no restrictions on the High Court or Sessions Court to entertain an application for bail, provided, accused is in custody.

West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 ----- Recording of Barga ---- Held that in order to establish bargadar in the land of another person, the Bargadar must prove the following : -
1. that he himself is cultivating land from his own sources;
2. that he shares crops with the land owner, in the proportion provided in the Act and such factum of sharing of crops must be established by documentary evidence, namely receipt;
3. that in case of refusal to accept the share crops by the land owner, he must deposit the same to the credit of the land owner with the concerned Block Land and Land Reforms Officer and obtain a receipt;
4. that in case of refusal to grant receipt against tendering of share crops, the bargadar has to lodge a complaint before the Magistrate under Section 19A (2A) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act.

West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955. S. 19A (2A) ----- Lodging of complaint ----- Held: therein that lodging of such complaint, prima facie establishes the fact of refusal to grant receipt as Section 19A (2A) of the West Bengal land Reforms Act provides that refusal to grant receipt is a punishable offence and the same is cognizable also. Therefore, the importance of issuance of receipt is well‐understood.

West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955; S. 18 ----- Recording of Barga ---- Standard of proof ----- Held: though laws of evidence is not strictly applied in such proceeding but the basic facts regarding cultivation of the petitioners’ land by the respondent No.7 and sharing of produce between them in the same proportion as mentioned in the said Act arerequired to be proved by substantive evidence.

West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955; S. 18 ------ Refusal by landowner to accept the share of produce ---- Duty cast upon claimed Barga ----- He should intimate the B.L. & L.R.O. and must deposit the share of crop with the Revenue Officer against receipt ----- Issuance of notice to the Land owners regarding deposit of such share of crops ----- Intimation given to the Pradhan about the refusal to accept the share of the produce by the petitioner, cannot be regarded as due compliance of the provision contained in Section 18 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; S. 205 ------ Exemption from personal appearance ----- Case under section 498A IPC read with S.4 of D.P. Act at Patna ----- Appellant No. 1 is a retired Army personal and residing in Pune, Appellant No. 2, Appellant No. 3 and 4 are also resident of Pune and the husband is working in Hyderabad ------- The appellants are engaged in their respective jobs at their respective places ------ Sufficient grounds are there to allow application under section 205 Cr.P.C.