Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 19 (3.40 seconds)
Documents citing Varsha Kapoor vs Uoi & Ors. on 3 June, 2010

Ms. Nidhi Kaushik vs Union Of India & Ors. on 26 May, 2014

25. Findings 25.1. The proceedings under Section 12 of the DV Act filed by the appellant's sister-in-law are civil in nature as held by the Supreme Court and various High Courts in Indra Sarma (supra), Varsha Kapoor (supra), Shambhu Prasad Singh (supra), Sabana (supra), Bipin Prataprai Bhatt (supra), Narendrakumar (supra), Naorem Shamungou Singh (supra) and Vijaya Baskar (supra). 25.2. The respondent has not controverted the provisions of the DV Act as well as the judgments mentioned above. The respondent's contention that the provisions of the DV Act and the judgments mentioned above are irrelevant is highly irresponsible. If the respondent could not controvert the settled position of law arising out of clear statutory provisions and the judgments, the respondent should have fairly conceded instead of labeling the submissions as irrelevant.
Delhi High Court Cites 149 - Cited by 12 - J R Midha - Full Document

Smt. Preeti Satija vs Smt. Raj Kumari And Anr. on 15 January, 2014

a) Main enacting part which deals with those aggrieved persons, who are "in a domestic relationship". Thus, in those cases where aggrieved person is in a domestic relationship with other person against whom she has sought any relief under the DV Act, in that case, such person as Respondent has to be an adult male person. Given that aggrieved person has to be a female, such aggrieved person in a domestic relationship can be a mother, a sister, a daughter, sister-in-law, etc.
Delhi High Court Cites 34 - Cited by 93 - S R Bhat - Full Document

Mr. Dinesh Kumar vs Mrs. Angoori on 30 July, 2016

9. This question is no more res integra as having faced similar question, High Court of Delhi in the cases of Versha Kapoor v. Union of India, 2010 (VI) AD Delhi 472 and Kusum Lata Sharma v. State, Crl. M.C. No.725/2011, decided on 02.09.2011, held that even a female can be a respondent under the Act in question. Therefore, this argument cannot be sustained that being woman appellant no.2 could not be impleaded as respondent in a complaint filed by respondent no.1 herein under Section 12 of the Act.
Delhi District Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 Next