The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently ruled that family members cannot be held liable in dowry cases unless there is clear evidence of their active involvement. Casual mention of their names in the FIR does not justify legal action against them.
The Bombay High Court rejected a wife’s plea to overturn a divorce decree, citing her absence during the hearings despite multiple summons being issued. The court ruled that the wife, who had filed criminal cases against her husband, was aware of the legal process and chose not to attend.
The Uttarakhand High Court has ruled that parties can be represented through a power of attorney in divorce proceedings under the Hindu Marriage Act, reversing a Family Court’s earlier decision.
The Bombay High Court ruled that making false accusations of being a “womaniser” and “alcoholic” without proof amounts to cruelty, upholding a Pune family court’s decision to dissolve a marriage.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that a wife cannot be denied maintenance unless continuous adultery is proven, dismissing a husband’s attempt to discredit his wife’s maintenance claim.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted divorce to a man citing cruelty after his wife filed false cases against him. The court also awarded Rs. 18 lakhs in alimony.
The High Court has upheld the right of a widowed daughter-in-law to claim maintenance from her father-in-law. Despite his advanced age, the court ruled that he must provide ₹1,000 monthly support, affirming her legal rights under family law.
The Kerala High Court has ruled that a husband’s act of comparing his wife to other women and repeatedly belittling her amounts to mental cruelty, providing valid grounds for divorce. This decision underscores the importance of recognizing irreparable marriages.
The Madras High Court ruled that removing the husband from the home may be necessary to maintain domestic peace in cases of harassment. The Court emphasized that Family Courts should not hesitate to pass such orders, even if the husband has no alternative housing.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that when a husband has custody of minor children, his convenience should be prioritized in matrimonial cases. The Court rejected the wife’s request to transfer the case, ensuring the husband’s responsibility for travel expenses.
