Skip to main content

Foreign divorce decree not conclusive for cases in India: HC

Deciding a divorce case of an NRI couple, the Punjab and Haryana high court has ruled that any judgment passed by a court of another country in a matrimonial dispute would not be considered "conclusive" in relation to the same matrimonial dispute pending before an Indian court.

The court has held that couples who have tied the knot in India and migrated to foreign lands would be governed by Indian laws only and the matrimonial decree passed by a foreign court would be binding only if the orders are passed as per the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA).

A single bench headed by Justice Rajiv Narain Raina had passed these orders while dismissing a petition filed by one Rupak Rathi, who had challenged the divorce petition filed by his wife Anita Chaudhary as the couple had already got divorce in a UK court on the grounds of "irretrievable breakdown" of marriage.

Dismissing Rathi's petition, Justice Raina held, "Since irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not available in HMA, the foreign court decree would neither be binding in India nor recognized."

The complexity of the matter had come to the fore during divorce proceedings initiated by Rathi in Brantford County Court (BCC) in the UK on March 17, 2011.

While those proceedings were pending, Chaudhary filed a divorce petition in a Panchkula court under Section 13 of the HMA on grounds of cruelty by Rathi.

Both the proceedings carried on simultaneously for sometime before the English court passed a decree of divorce on January 31, 2012, on the ground that the marriage had "broken down irretrievably".

Following the divorce in UK, Rathi moved the Panchkula court seeking rejection of Chaudhary's divorce petition on the ground that the UK's divorce decree was binding. He also argued that the Panchkula court has no jurisdiction to entertain the divorce petition.

Chaudhary, however, contested that the UK had no jurisdiction to pass the decree of dissolution of marriage on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage, which is not available in HMA.

HC has now dismissed Rathi's objection petition and the divorce would be decided by the Panchkula court.

 Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Foreign-divorce-decree-not-conclusive-for-cases-in-India-HC/articleshow/33761821.cms

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Partition proceedings are vitiated even if single co-sharer is not made party or is not served in accordance with law

Cause Title :  Bhagwant Singh vs  Financial Commissioner (Appeals) Punjab, Chandigarh,  CWP-2132-2018 (O&M), High Court Of Punjab & Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Judgment/Order : 31.08.2022 Corum : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhir Mittal Background A large parcel of land was owned by the Nagar Panchayat. Thereafter, some of the co-sharers sold their shares to third parties including the petitioners herein. On 22.11.1995, respondents No.3 to 5 filed an application for partition of the land. The petitioners were not impleaded as parties.  On completion of proceedings, sanad was issued on 28.08.1996. Vide two separate sale deeds dated 28.05.2008 respondents No.3 and 5 sold some portion in favour of respondent No.6 and 7. These respondents sought implementation of the sanad resulting in issuance of warrants of possession dated 05.06.2008. Allegedly, it was then that the petitioners realized that joint land had been partitioned and that proceedings h...
Post a Comment
Read more

Power of Attorney holder can also file cheque bounce cases: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that a criminal complaint in a cheque bounce case can be filed and pursued by a person who holds a power of attorney (PoA) on behalf of the complainant. A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice P Sathasivam gave the "authoritative" pronouncement on the issue, referred to it by a division bench in view of conflicting judgements of some high courts and the apex court. "We are of the view that the power of attorney holder may be allowed to file, appear and depose for the purpose of issue of process for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (which deals with cheque bounce cases)," the bench, also comprising justices Ranjana Prakash Desai and Ranjan Gogoi, said. The bench, in its judgement, said, "...we clarify the position and answer the questions in the following manner: "Filing of complaint petition under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act through PoA holder is perfectly legal...
1 comment
Read more

Christian who reconverts as Hindu SC will get quota benefits

Amid the controversy over “ghar wapsi”, the Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that a person who “reconverts” from Christianity to Hinduism shall be entitled to reservation benefits if his forefathers belonged to a Scheduled Caste and the community accepts him after “reconversion”. Citing articles by B R Ambedkar and James Massey, and reports by Mandal Commission and Chinappa Commission, the court said: “There has been detailed study to indicate the Scheduled Caste persons belonging to Hindu religion, who had embraced Christianity with some kind of hope or aspiration, have remained socially, educationally and economically backward.” The bench of Justices Dipak Misra and V Gopala Gowda held that a person shall not be deprived of reservation benefits if he decides to “reconvert” to Hinduism and adopts the caste that his forefathers originally belonged to just because he was born to Christian parents or has a Christian spouse. Expanding the scope of a previous Constitution benc...
1 comment
Read more