Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 49 views

    Moot Court Memorial

    Uploaded by

    Anand Singh
    The marriage between the appellant and respondent took place in 2004 and they had a son named Rahul who is now 11 years old. After 3 months of marriage, they lived separately with the appellant moving back to Germany for work. During visits to India, misunderstandings between the couple increased. During a recent 10 day visit, the appellant's harassment of the respondent became extreme, forcing her to file for divorce on grounds of cruelty. The appellant also filed for custody of their son and to restore conjugal rights. The family court granted the divorce to the respondent, dismissed restoring conjugal rights, and granted custody to the mother. The appellant appealed this in high court. The issues raised regard the appellant's ability to appeal, the impact

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Moot Court Memorial

    Uploaded by

    Anand Singh
    49 views2 pages
    The marriage between the appellant and respondent took place in 2004 and they had a son named Rahul who is now 11 years old. After 3 months of marriage, they lived separately with the appellant moving back to Germany for work. During visits to India, misunderstandings between the couple increased. During a recent 10 day visit, the appellant's harassment of the respondent became extreme, forcing her to file for divorce on grounds of cruelty. The appellant also filed for custody of their son and to restore conjugal rights. The family court granted the divorce to the respondent, dismissed restoring conjugal rights, and granted custody to the mother. The appellant appealed this in high court. The issues raised regard the appellant's ability to appeal, the impact

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The marriage between the appellant and respondent took place in 2004 and they had a son named Rahul who is now 11 years old. After 3 months of marriage, they lived separately with the appellant moving back to Germany for work. During visits to India, misunderstandings between the couple increased. During a recent 10 day visit, the appellant's harassment of the respondent became extreme, forcing her to file for divorce on grounds of cruelty. The appellant also filed for custody of their son and to restore conjugal rights. The family court granted the divorce to the respondent, dismissed restoring conjugal rights, and granted custody to the mother. The appellant appealed this in high court. The issues raised regard the appellant's ability to appeal, the impact

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    49 views2 pages

    Moot Court Memorial

    Uploaded by

    Anand Singh
    The marriage between the appellant and respondent took place in 2004 and they had a son named Rahul who is now 11 years old. After 3 months of marriage, they lived separately with the appellant moving back to Germany for work. During visits to India, misunderstandings between the couple increased. During a recent 10 day visit, the appellant's harassment of the respondent became extreme, forcing her to file for divorce on grounds of cruelty. The appellant also filed for custody of their son and to restore conjugal rights. The family court granted the divorce to the respondent, dismissed restoring conjugal rights, and granted custody to the mother. The appellant appealed this in high court. The issues raised regard the appellant's ability to appeal, the impact

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    Moot Court Memorial

    The marriage between the appellant and the respondent was solemnized on
    31.01.2004 asper the Hindu Religious Rites and Customs. A son Rahul was born
    and is 11 years old now. He is also academically exceptional. At the time of
    marriage, the Respondent was a Business Man in Germany.

    After marriage, the Appellant and the Respondent lived t


    o g e t h e r f o r 3 m o n t h s a n d . t he r e af te r l i ve d s e p a ra t el y a n d . t h e
    a p p e l l a nt . we n t b a c k t o Ge r m a n y b eca u s e o f t h emisunderstandings
    between them. Only during business trips to India, he visited his son
    who lived with the mother in her flat, which was gifted
    to.her.by.her.parents.as.Stridhan..Wi t h ev e r y v i si t o f t h e h u s b a n d , t
    h e m i s u n d er s ta n d i n g s b et we e n t h e sp o u s e s b e c a me . aggravated
    and he started questioning the character and morality of the wife. The
    wife always tried her level best to save their marriage.

    In the recent 10 days trip of Mr. Anil, he stayed with his wife in her place. During
    the stay, the harassment and cruelty of the Appellant crossed the extreme
    extent for which the re s p o n d e n t wa s c o m p e ll e d t o fi le a p e ti ti o n
    f o r d i v or c e o n t h e g r o u n d of c r u elt y . T h e husband held an original
    petition under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 for the custody of 10 years old
    son and also a petition for Resolution of Conjugal Rights.

    The Principal Judge of Family Court passed an Ex-Parte Decree of


    divorce in favour of the wife and petition for Restitution of Conjugal Rights
    filed by the appellant was dismissed for default. After considering the oral
    evidence adduced by the parties and examining the documentary evidence
    and also interviewing the child, the custody should be given to the mother and
    dismissed the original petition of the father filed under the Guardians
    and Wards Act. The husband filed an appeal before the High Court against the
    order of the Trial Court.

    ISSUES RAISED

    1. Whether the Appellant Mr. Anil has locus standi to file an appeal in the High
    Court?
    2. Will remarriage of the respondent amounts to termination of guardianship?
    3.W h e t h e r t h e d e c i s i o n o f t h e s u b o r d i n a t e c o u r t o f d i s m i s
    s i n g t h e p e t i t i o n f o r restitution of conjugal rights was justified?
    4. Whether the custody of the child to his mother will be detrimental to
    his physical and mental welfare? And whether the financial condition
    of the mother shall betaken into consideration while giving away the custody
    of the child?
    5. Whether the act of the husband (accusation of unchastity) actually
    amounted to cruelty towards his wife?

    You might also like