Important Judgment on Section 12 of Hindu Marriage Act.
Section 12 of Hindu Marriage Act.
Section 12 of Hindu Marriage Act -Judgement against Husband. Husband gives wrong Salary and family property details in bio data, hence wife took annulment. Anurag Anand vs Sunita Anand– Delhi HC- Date of Decision 11 October 1996- Equivalent Citation -1997 IAD Delhi 37, AIR 1997 Delhi 94, 65 (1997) DLT 1037, II (1996) DMC 389, 1997 (40) DRJ 68.
No Stridhan and Alimony and Annulment on Hiding Past. Marriage expenses cant be returned. Sudha Suhas Nandanvankar vs Suhas Ramrao Nandanvankar– Bombay HC-15 September 2004- Equivalent Citation-AIR 2005 Bom 62, 2005 (1) BomCR 591, 2004 (4) MhLj 1052.
Wife is psychologically impotent and the marriage has not been consummated due to this reason, concealment of material fact. Urmila Devi vs Narinder Singh– Himachal Pradesh HC-12 September 2006- Equivalent Citation-AIR 2007 HP 19, 2006 (2) ShimLC 445.
Consent for marriage was taken by hiding important facts, wife was cruel, so annulment and Divorce was granted. Rama Kanta Vs Mohinder Laxmidas Bhandula- Punjab-Haryana HC-07 February 1995- Equivalent Citation-AIR 1996 P H 98.
Section 12 1 (a) of Hindu Marriage Act
Although the Wife is not structurally or psychologically incapable of allowing sexual intercourse generally, yet she has an uncontrollable aversion to allowing coitus to the petitioner-husband. This case belongs to the rare variety of frigidity quoad hanc. Shantabai vs Tarachand– Madhya Pradesh HC-22 April 1965- Equivalent Citation-AIR 1966 MP 8.
Appellant expressed her unwillingness to get examined by the medical expert, learned Family Court was entitled to draw the adverse inference against her declaring the marriage of appellant and respondent as null and void, marriage could not be consummated owing to the hysteria or extreme sensibility of the wife and there was no question of any structural defect. Renuka vs Rajendra Hada– Rajasthan HC-18 January 2007- Equivalent Citation-AIR 2007 Raj 112, RLW 2007 (3) Raj 1839.
A party is impotent if his or her mental or physical condition makes consummation of the marriage a practical impossibility further a particular kind of impotency known as Impotentia quoad hunc vel ham means incapacity to perform coitus with a particular individual. Anuradha Alias Chanchal Kumari vs Santoshnath Khanna- Delhi HC-27 September 1977- ILR 1977 Delhi 739, 1978 RLR 111.
Physical disability of not having attained puberty, consummation has not taken place and as already referred it was on account of the appellant’s repugnancy for consummation and probably on account of her reluctance towards consummation due to her physical disability. Maganti Kanakadurga vs Maganti Venkateswarlu– Andhra HC-27 April 2006- Equivalent Citation-AIR 2006 AP 259, 2006 (4) ALD 411.
The requirements of Section 12 (1) (a) of the Act are satisfied as no sexual intercourse has taken place between the parties. Moina Khosla vs Amardeep Singh Khosla– Delhi HC-31 January 1986- Equivalent Citation-AIR 1986 Delhi 399, 1986 (10) DRJ 286.
Section 12 (1) (c) of Hindu Marriage Act
Section 12 (1) (c) of Hindu Marriage Act-Wife was suffering from Mental Illness. This material fact concealed hence annulment. Wife may seek Alimony.- Kiran Bala Asthana And Anr. Vs Bhaire Prasad Srivastava– Allahabad HC- Date of Decision 08 February 1982- Equivalent Citation -AIR 1982 All 242.
Marriage was not consummated, wife has a lover from prior to marriage. Chhandupriya @ Priyanka vs Rahul Mahod– Bombay HC – Nagpur- Date of Decision-17 March 2016.
Material fact concealed by the wife as she was suffering from leprosy prior to marriage resulted in annulment of marriage, wife may seek alimony. Chandrakala Alias Vandana vs Subhash Dhondiba Gaokhandkar– Bombay HC- Date of Decision-23 February 1994- Equivalent Citation-(1994) 96 BOMLR 726.
Wife was suffering from mental illness prior to marriage. This material fact was concealed by the wife resulted in annulment of marriage, wife may seek alimony. Kiran Bala Asthana And Anr. vs Bhaire Prasad Srivastava– Allahabad HC- Date of Decision-08 February 1982- Equivalent Citation -AIR 1982 All 242.
Separation denied as wife was guilty of cruelty but husband condoned it, subsequent conduct of wife is not a revival of the original cause of action. N G Dastane vs S Dastane– Supreme Court- Date of Decision-19 March 1975- Equivalent Citation-AIR 1975 SC 1534, (1975) 2 SCC 326, 1975 (3) SCR 967.
Material fact concealed by the wife as she was suffering from sexual disorder resulted in annulment of marriage, wife may seek alimony. P.V. Gopalkrishnan vs Kanaksha Gopalkrishnan -Bombay HC- Date of Decision-14 July 1981- Equivalent Citation-1982 (1) BomCR 454.
Transfer request declined, wife filed annulment of marriage and then asked for transfer to her hometown, Wife was earlier working so transfer request declined as she was treated as independent. R.Logeswari vs K.Arul Jothi– Madras HC- Date of Decision-20 December 2016- Tr.C.M.P.No.476 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.13031 of 2016.
Annulment cum Divorce allowed. Marriage consummated, suicidal traits in the wife so Divorce Allowed. Rajasi @ Swapna vs Shashank Dandge– Bombay HC – Nagpur- Date of Decision-06 January 2015- FAMILY COURT APPEAL No. 166/2014 WITH CROSS OBJECTION ST. No. 5743/2014.
Wife broke Mangalsutra and refused coitus, filed 498A, divorce on cruelty, high alimony- Sadhana Satish Kolvankar vs Satish Sachidanand Kolvankar– Bombay HC- Date of Decision-15 July 2004- Equivalent Citation-2005 (2) BomCR 340, 2005 (1) MhLj 935
Hindu Marriage Act 12 (1) (c) Wife was suffering from schizophrenia. This material fact concealed hence Annulment. Wife may seek Alimony. Vandana J. Kasliwal vs Jitendra N. Kasliwal– Bombay HC- Date of Decision-28 September 2006- Equivalent Citation-AIR 2007 Bom 115, II (2007) DMC 227.
DISCLAIMER: The above judgments are posted for informational purpose ONLY. Printouts from this website are not admissible citation in the Court of Law. For a court admissible copy contacts your advocate.