REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Kantian Appellant

V/S

Maragathammal, Chinnaponnu, Mariammal And Ananthakumari Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

GURUPAD KHANDAPPA MAGDUM V. HIRABAI KHANDAPPA MAGDUM AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
KALAWATI V. RATAN CHAND [REFERRED TO]
JASBIR KAUR V. RANJIT SINGH [REFERRED TO]
ERAMMA VS. VEERUPANA [REFERRED TO]
GOWLI BUDDANNA VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX MYSORE [REFERRED TO]
N V NARENDRANATH VS. COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
SITABAI VS. RAMCHANDRA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. NARAYAN RAO SHAM RAO DESHMUKH [REFERRED TO]
KIRTIKANT D VADODARIA VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
ANUJ GARG VS. HOTEL ASSOCIATION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
BHANWAR SINGH VS. PURAN [REFERRED TO]
G SEKAR VS. GEETHA [REFERRED TO]
PREMA VS. NANJE GOWDA [REFERRED TO]
GANDURI KOTESHWARAMMA VS. CHAKIRI YANADI [REFERRED TO]
M CHIMPRAMMA VS. P SUBRAHMANYAM [REFERRED TO]
Chandramma VS. Maniam Venkatareddi [REFERRED TO]
KIRAN BALA SAHA VS. BANKIM CHANDRA SAHA [REFERRED TO]
A ANNAMALAN MUDALIAR VS. PERUMAYEE AMMAL [REFERRED TO]
RAGHAVAN VS. SATHYABHAMA JAYAKUMARI [REFERRED TO]
PRAVAL CHANDRA PATTNAIK VS. SARAT CHANDRA PATTNAIK [REFERRED TO]
PERUMAL NAICKER VS. SITHA LAKSHMI AMMAL [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNA MADHAV GHULE AND OTHERS VS. PADMJNIBAI MOHAN GHULE [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant/First Defendant has preferred the present Second Appeal as against the Judgment and Decree dated 11.12.2002 in A.S. No. 25 of 2002 passed by the Learned Principal District Judge, Tiruvannamalai in affirming the Judgment and Decree dated 04.12.2001 in O.S. No. 482 of 1982 passed by the Learned District Munsif No. 1, Tiruvannamalai. A resume of germane averments of the Plaint (filed by the Respondents/Plaintiffs) are hereunder: -

(2.) ONE son and one daughter viz., Second and Third Plaintiffs are in the custody of the First Respondent/First Plaintiff while other two daughters are in the custody of the Appellant/First Defendant. The Appellant/First Defendant became addicted to drink about four or five years ago and from that time onwards, he has completely neglected the family and began to treat the Plaintiffs cruelly and used to beat them mercilessly. The Third Defendant joined hands with the Appellant/First Defendant and started to ill -treat the Plaintiffs. About two years ago, the cruelty meted out by the First and Third Defendants exceeded the limits and in spite of the same, the First Respondent/First Plaintiff bore with them with the fond hope that good sense would prevail upon the First and Second Defendants.

(3.) THE Appellant/First Defendant married the Fourth Respondent /Second Defendant and he is living with her. The marriage between the Appellant/First Defendant is void in law. On that sole ground, the Appellant/First Defendant is to provide separate maintenance to the First Respondent/First Plaintiff.

Click here to view full judgment.

KANTIAN Vs. MARAGATHAMMAL, CHINNAPONNU, MARIAMMAL AND ANANTHAKUMARI

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address