The Gujarat High Court held that a registered marriage certificate alone cannot validate a Hindu marriage if essential ceremonies under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 were not performed. The Court said registration only proves an already solemnised marriage and cannot create a valid marital bond.
The Allahabad High Court upheld a maintenance order directing a husband to pay his wife, ruling that a PM Awas Yojana house cannot replace maintenance rights. The Court said an able-bodied husband cannot avoid responsibility by claiming unemployment or low income under law.
The Karnataka High Court ruled that maintenance cannot be granted to wives automatically without examining financial circumstances. Justice Chillakur Sumalatha said courts must consider income, independence and responsibilities of both spouses before passing orders, setting aside a direction requiring a husband to pay Rs 20,000 monthly.
The Jharkhand High Court upheld a divorce decree after observing that a 36-year separation had turned the marriage into a “dead wood marriage.” While ending the decades-long relationship, the Court increased permanent alimony for the wife from Rs 10 lakh to Rs 40 lakh.
The Rajasthan High Court dismissed a husband’s plea seeking narco-analysis, polygraph and DNA tests in a divorce dispute. Justice Sanjeet Purohit upheld the family court order, ruling that such tests were unnecessary, delayed, and could not be imposed without consent.
The Supreme Court stayed a Rajasthan High Court order allowing parents of an inter-caste married woman to meet her, after the couple expressed fears of honour killing and threats from her family following their marriage.
Supreme Court Issues Notice On Anubhav Mohanty’s Plea Seeking Quashing Of Criminal Case Filed By Ex-Wife In Matrimonial Dispute; Odisha Government Asked To Respond As Actor Challenges Orissa HC Order
The Telangana High Court held that permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act requires a separate application and cannot be granted automatically in divorce proceedings. The Court ruled formal pleading is necessary before awarding maintenance.
The Madras High Court held that Section 498A proceedings cannot be initiated merely because a marriage has broken down or because the accused are related to the spouses involved in the dispute. Quashing proceedings against the husband’s relatives, the Court said vague and omnibus allegations cannot be used to drag family members into matrimonial disputes.
The Telangana High Court annulled a marriage after finding that the husband had misrepresented his date of birth on an online matrimonial platform. The Court held that the incorrect age details misled the wife regarding horoscope compatibility, leading her to consent to marriage under a mistaken belief.
