Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.69 seconds)
Shri Ved Prakash Gulati vs Smt.Kusum on 8 July, 2011 cites

Narayan Ganesh Dastane vs Sucheta Narayan Dastane on 19 March, 1975

The inquiry therefore has to be whether the conduct charged as cruelty is of such a character as to cause in the mind of the petitioner a reasonable apprehension that it will be harmful or injurious for him to live with the respondent. It is not necessary, as under the English law that the cruelty must be of such a character as to cause "danger" to life, limb or health or as to give rise to a reasonable apprehension of such a danger. Clearly, danger to life, limb or health or a reasonable apprehension of it is a higher requirement than a reasonable apprehension that it is harmful or injurious for one spouse to live with the other." FAO 440/2003 Page 12 of 25 This concept of cruelty as given in the abovesaid judgment was further expanded in the subsequent legal pronouncements and in the recent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in the case of Manisha Tyagi Vs. Deepak Kumar (2010)4 SCC 339 where it was held that the concept of cruelty as was defined in Dastane vs. Dastane is no longer the required standard and that now it is sufficient to show that the conduct of one of the spouses is so abnormal and below expected norms that the other spouse would not reasonably be expected to put up with it. Relevant para of the said judgment is reproduced as under.
Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 190 - Y V Chandrachud - Full Document

Manisha Tyagi vs Deepak Kumar on 10 February, 2010

The inquiry therefore has to be whether the conduct charged as cruelty is of such a character as to cause in the mind of the petitioner a reasonable apprehension that it will be harmful or injurious for him to live with the respondent. It is not necessary, as under the English law that the cruelty must be of such a character as to cause "danger" to life, limb or health or as to give rise to a reasonable apprehension of such a danger. Clearly, danger to life, limb or health or a reasonable apprehension of it is a higher requirement than a reasonable apprehension that it is harmful or injurious for one spouse to live with the other." FAO 440/2003 Page 12 of 25 This concept of cruelty as given in the abovesaid judgment was further expanded in the subsequent legal pronouncements and in the recent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in the case of Manisha Tyagi Vs. Deepak Kumar (2010)4 SCC 339 where it was held that the concept of cruelty as was defined in Dastane vs. Dastane is no longer the required standard and that now it is sufficient to show that the conduct of one of the spouses is so abnormal and below expected norms that the other spouse would not reasonably be expected to put up with it. Relevant para of the said judgment is reproduced as under.
Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 62 - S S Nijjar - Full Document

Samar Ghosh vs Jaya Ghosh on 26 March, 2007

In the case of Samar Ghosh Vs. Jaya Ghosh (2007)4 SCC 511, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has given a treatise on the subject, examining the amplitude of cruelty in deferent countries and gauging the judicial trends, the Apex Court also laid down broad parameters which may be relevant in dealing with the case of mental cruelty and the said illustrative instances as narrated in the said judgment are as under:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 21 - Cited by 730 - D Bhandari - Full Document
1   2 Next