Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.19 seconds)
Jaibai Rangnath Keskar And Another vs Gangubai Bhanudas Sakhare And Others on 16 February, 2024
cites
Section 11 in The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 [Entire Act]
The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
Section 6 in The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 [Entire Act]
Shantaram Tukaran Patil And Anr. vs Dagubai Tukaram Patil And Ors. on 9 January, 1987
15. The first appellate Court reproduced the view of this Court
in the case of Shantaram Tukaram Patil Vs. Smt. Dagdubai
Tukaram Patil AIR 1987 Bombay 182 , which reads thus;
Revanasiddappa & Anr vs Mallikarjun & Ors on 31 March, 2011
16. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Revanasiddappa
and Another Vs. Mallikarjun and Others Civil Appeal No. 2844 of
201, pronounced the verdict on the rights of a child born of the
15 Judgment SA 128-93 & SA 205-1993.odt
void marriage under section 16 (3) of the Hindu Marriage Act
and held that a child who is conferred with legislative legitimacy
under Section 16(1) and 16(2) would not be entitled to the right
in or to the property of any person other than the parents. The
property of parents, where the parents had an interest in the
property of a joint Hindu family, governed under the Mitakshra
law, has to be ascertained in terms of the explanation to sub-
section 3.
Vineeta Sharma vs Rakesh Sharma on 11 August, 2020
There is a sea change in the rule of succession and shares
of males and females. The male and female legal hers are brought
at par. There were various opinions of this Court of Law on the
rights of women under the amendment of 2005. Finally, Vineeta
Sharma ( supra) laid down the law that though the father is not
alive on the amendment of 2005, the daughters have an equal
share as a coparcener.
Prakash vs Phulavati . on 16 October, 2015
It does not specifically deal with those final decrees
18 Judgment SA 128-93 & SA 205-1993.odt
proceedings that have already been concluded based on the
earlier law laid down in the Prakash Vs. Phulavati Judgment. In
this case, the final decree has not yet been passed. The suits were
contested and brought up to this Court. Therefore, the
amendment of Section 2005 has a retroactive effect, and that
would apply to the case at hand.