Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.69 seconds)
Documents citing Amjum Hasan Siddiqui vs Smt. Salma B. on 18 January, 1992

Suprabha vs Sivaraman on 25 January, 2006

But at the same time the Supreme Court approved the decision of the Allahabad High Court in Amjum Hassan Siddiqui v. Salma . In that case, the application was filed under Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. It was contended that the parties were married on 4-10-1983 and the appellant divorced the respondent on 25-2-1991. But she had neither been paid the dower money nor the articles given to her on the occasion of her marriage returned to her.
Kerala High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 16 - S Nambiar - Full Document

Avaran Koya vs Mariyam on 15 December, 1992

13. Identical question as the one raised in this proceeding came up for consideration before a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Amjum Hasan Siddiqui v. Salma B, (AIR 1992 Allahabad 322). The learned Judges of the Division Bench took the view that the Family Court was not competent to deal with a petition moved under Section 3 of the 1986 Act for want of jurisdiction. We are in respectful agreement with that decision.
Kerala High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Sanjay Kumar Sharma vs Smt. Vidya Sharma And Anr. on 12 December, 2002

6. Mr. Bhuyan, learned Counsel for opposite party No. 1, on the other hand while vehemently objecting to the contention of the petitioner draws my attention to a decision of Karnataka High Court, reported in AIR 1991 Karnataka 201, Vasumathi v. Chandriyani Madhavi which is rendered under the Indian Succession Act and Muslim Women (Protection of Rights and Divorce) Act and the judgment of Allahabad High Court, reported in AIR 1992 Allahabad 322, Anjum Hasan Siddiqui v. Smt. Salma S. and submits that there are certain cases which do not come within the provisions of Section 7 of the Act and the present case is one of such cases and can never be tried by the Family Court. According to him, it is only the Civil Court which is competent to try the suit of this nature.
Orissa High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 1 - B P Das - Full Document

Meela Pradeep vs Mary Benatt on 18 July, 2006

But at the same time the Supreme Court approved the decision of the Allahabad High Court in Amjum Hassan Siddiqui V. Salma (AIR 1992 Allahabad 322). In that case, the application was filed under S.3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. It was contended that the parties were Mat. Appeal No.364/06 9 married on 4.10.1983 and the appellant divorced the respondent on 25.2.1991. But she had neither been paid the dower money nor the articles given to her on the occasion of her marriage returned to her.
Kerala High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

K.A. Abdul Jaleel vs T.A. Shahida on 10 April, 2003

In Amjum Hasan Siddiqui's case (supra) an application was filed in terms of Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. The question before the Allahabad High Court arose as to whether a Family Court could deal with such a dispute. It was held that no application could lie before the Family Court as the claim under Section 3 of the 1986 Act would neither be a suit nor a proceeding within the meaning of Section 7 of the Family Courts Act inasmuch as such an application could only be moved before the First Class Magistrate having requisite jurisdiction as provided for in the Code of Criminal Procedure. The said decision, in our opinion, cannot be said to have any application whatsoever in the instant case.
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 126 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Mohd. Nadim vs Smt. Taliya Fatima @ Shama Parveen on 6 July, 2010

Issue which has been sought to be raised by petitioner before this Court has already been examined by Division Bench of this Court in the case of Amjum Hasan Siddiqui Vs. Salma B reported in 1992 AIR (All) 322 and therein view has been taken that application under Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 can lie only to the Magistrate, having jurisdiction in the area and provision of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 confers no jurisdiction on the Family Court whereas Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of 1986 Act provides that an application may be made before the Magistrate and not to Family Court. Relevant extract of the said judgment is being extracted below.
Allahabad High Court Cites 25 - Cited by 1 - V K Shukla - Full Document
1   2 Next