PATRICIA CAROLE FISCHER Vs. MAURICE PATRICK FISCHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal coming on us for hearing on Monday the second day of March 1992 and on this day upon perusing the petition of Appeal, the order of the Lower Court, and the material papers in the case, and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. P. Subramanian, Advocate for the Appellant, and of Mr. S. Parthasarathy, Amicus Curiae appointed under Rule 142 of Criminal Rules of Practice and Orders, 1958 and the respondent, on appearing in person or by Advocate the Court delivered the following Judgment:-

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant as well as the amicus curiae took me through several decisions of Courts in this country as well as the English courts and the text books. After an analysis of the various judgments cited before me I am of the view that the question as to whether a person is a domicile of a particular country is a mixed question of law and fact and it cannot be decided purely as a question of law on the basis of the averments found in a pleading. Before referring to the relevant authorities on the subject it is necessary to advert to the provisions in the Act and the averments in the pleading.

(3.) Sec. 2 of the Act is in the following terms: