Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 19 (0.99 seconds)
Documents citing Ramkanya Bai vs Bharatram on 22 October, 2009

Rajesh Kumar Chaudhary vs Smt. Sarita on 19 July, 2019

20. Recently, in the case of Ramkanya Bai v. Bharatram4 decided by the Bench of which one of us, R.M. Lodha, J. was the member, the order of the High Court directing DNA of the child at the instance of the husband was set aside and it was held that the High Court was not justified in allowing the application for grant of DNA of the child on the ground that there will be possibility of reunion of the parties if such DNA was conducted and if it was found from the outcome of the DNA that the son was born out of the wedlock of the parties.
Allahabad High Court Cites 75 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ajay Singh vs Smt. Rama Bai on 2 March, 2020

20. Recently, in Ramkanya Bai v. Bharatram decided by the Bench of which one of us, R.M. Lodha, J. was the member, the order of the High Court directing DNA test of the child at the instance of the husband was set aside and it was held that the High Court was not justified in allowing the application for grant of DNA test of the child on the ground that there will be possibility of reunion of the parties if such DNA test was conducted and if it was found from the outcome of the DNA test that the son was born from the wedlock of the parties.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - G S Ahluwalia - Full Document

Bhabani Prasad Jena Etc vs Convenr.Sec.Orissa S.Comn.For ... on 3 August, 2010

12. Recently, in the case of Ramkanya Bai v. Bharatram4 decided by the Bench of which one of us, R.M. Lodha, J. was the member, the order of the High Court directing DNA of the child at 4 (2010) 1 SCC 85 16 the instance of the husband was set aside and it was held that the High Court was not justified in allowing the application for grant of DNA of the child on the ground that there will be possibility of reunion of the parties if such DNA was conducted and if it was found from the outcome of the DNA that the son was born out of the wedlock of the parties.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 137 - R M Lodha - Full Document

Sri. Hanumappa vs Yallakka on 3 September, 2014

20. Recently, in the case of Ramkanya Bai v. Bharatram, (2010) 1 SCC 85 decided by the Bench of which one of us, R.M. Lodha, J. was the member, the order of the High Court directing DNA of the child at the instance of the husband was set aside and it was held that the High Court was not justified in allowing the application for grant of 42 DNA of the child on the ground that there will be possibility of reunion of the parties if such DNA was conducted and if it was found from the outcome of the DNA that the son was born out of the wedlock of the parties.
Karnataka High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 4 - A Byrareddy - Full Document

Bhabani Prasad Jena Etc vs Convenr.Sec.Orissa S.Comn.For ... on 3 August, 2010

12. Recently, in the case of Ramkanya Bai v. Bharatram4 decided by the Bench of which one of us, R.M. Lodha, J. was the member, the order of the High Court directing DNA of the child at 4 (2010) 1 SCC 85 16 the instance of the husband was set aside and it was held that the High Court was not justified in allowing the application for grant of DNA of the child on the ground that there will be possibility of reunion of the parties if such DNA was conducted and if it was found from the outcome of the DNA that the son was born out of the wedlock of the parties.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - R M Lodha - Full Document

‘W’ vs ‘H’ & Anr on 26 August, 2016

"12. Recently, in Ramkanya Bai v. Bharatram [(2010) 1 SCC 85] decided by the Bench of which one of us, R.M. Lodha, J. was the member, the order of the High Court directing DNA test of the child at the instance of the husband was set aside and it was held that the High Court was not justified in allowing the application for grant of DNA test of the child on the ground that there will be possibility of reunion of the parties if such DNA test was conducted and if it was found from the outcome of the MAT.APP.(FC)No.17/2016 Page 17 of 95 DNA test that the son was born from the wedlock of the parties.
Delhi High Court Cites 47 - Cited by 2 - G Mittal - Full Document

X vs State & Anr on 17 July, 2025

81. Similarly, in the case of Ramkanya Bai vs. Bharatram, (2010) 1 SCC 85 wherein the Order of the High Court directing DNA test of the child was set-aside by holding that it was not justified because there was a possibility of re-union. It was held that the discretion must be exercised only after balancing the interest of the parties and on due consideration whether for a just decision in the matter, DNA test is imminently needed.
Delhi High Court Cites 42 - Cited by 0 - N B Krishna - Full Document
1   2 Next