Restitution of Conjugal rights Tamanna and Abhiram both resident of Jalgoan decided to

marry each other in 2011 according to Hindu Ceremonies. The couple got their Marriage
registered as per the provisions of The Special Marriage Act, 1954 and in effect a marriage
certificate was issued by the authorities. They had two children’s out of this wedlock born in
the year 2012 and 2016 respectively. Tamanna was a disciple of Peer Baba and had blind faith
on baba. Even after marriage she continued to visit Baba . Abhiram was not happy with these
practices. In January 2014, after taking voluntary retirement from Indian Navy Abhiram went
to France for higher studies. Tamanna refused to visit foreign nation for one year on the
advice of Baba. Abhiram left for France alone. Then in April 2015 , Abhiram called his wife
to join him in France along with their first child. In January 2016, their second child was born
in France. In Feb-2016, he came back to jalgoan along with his wife and two kids. In March
2016 , Abhiram told his family that he has to clear some institutional formalities at France
and he will return after six months. After moving to France in March 2016, Abhiram got
opportunity to work with leading university and stayed in France.After Sept- 2016 he severed
all his contacts with Tamanna. In Jan -2017 Tamanna wrote a letter to Abhiram expressing her
willingness to join Abhiram in France. She also explained that Baba has advised her and
Abhiram to live together under one roof otherwise Baba will Curse them. Abhiram in reply
wrote to Tamanna that she should not come to France as he was interested in getting their
marrage dissolved. In Dec-2017 he got the citizenship of France. In April -2018, he filed
petition for divorce in Trial court of France on the ground that marriage has irretrievably
broken down. Tamanna could not contest these proceedings. She having no means to go to
France . Parents of Tamanna visited her mother in law and asked them to talk to their son.
Tamanna tried to make Abhiram understand about Hindu culture but he refused to continue
the marriage . Mean while on July 13 2018, trial Court of France granted a divorce decree in
favour of Abhiram. Further the court order that the husdand would pay to his wife and
children an amount of Rs:35000 per month for their maintenance. After the decree of Trial
Court of France, Abhiram and Evelyn entered in a civil solidarity pact in Aug 03 2018.
Abhiram didn’t disclose the facts of ex-party decree of divorce and his entering into a
relationship with Evelyn to his parents and Tamanna. Abhiram continued to pay the
maintenance amout to Tamanna through crediting the amount in her bank account in months
of Jul;y, August and September 2018. After paying maintenance for three months Abhiram
failed to pay maintenance to wife and children. Mean while Tamanna came to know about ex-
parte decree of divorce. Tamanna approached the legal Aid cell, Jalgoan. Cell helped
Tamanna through a letter to the trial court of France that she be provided legal aid. Thereafter,
proceedings were initiated and warrant of arrest was issued against Abhiram. She further said
that the ex-party decree of divorce obtained by the husband was not binding on her and was
illegal and that she continued to be the wife of Abhiram. She further asserted that as per the
provision of the special marriage act-1954 the ground of divorce (on the basis of adultery
cruelty and desertion ) under section 27 of the act are available to the wife under the given the
set of circumstances. Infacts, she is the actual victim, who was being further victimized by
the order of the France Trial court. In December-2018, Tamanna filed a petition under section
22 of The Special Marriage act, 1954, for Restitution of conjugal Rights in the District Court,
Jalgoan. Abhiram appeared in court and filed an application for dismissal of petition. He
referred to the decree of divorce granted by the Trial Court of France and said that despite
notice, Tamanna did not contest the same and by not raising any objection she is deemed to
have accepted the jurisdiction of the foreign court. Further, by accepting the maintenance,
Tamanna again in effect accepted the judgment of foreign court and is thus stopped from
filing the present petition (under section 11 read with section 151 of CPC,1908). The case is
pending for adjudication in District Court, Jalgoan. Legal Issues: 1)Whether the marriage of
Tamanna and Abhiram is valid under the provisions of The Special Marriage Act,1954? 2)
Whether non contest by the wife of divorce petition filed by the husband in a Foreign court
imply that she had conceded to the jurisdiction of the foreign court ? 3)Whether the principle
of Res-judicata under sec.11 of CPC ,1908 is applicable to the proceedings being initiated by
the District Court, Jalgoan? 4)Whether the relationship of Abhiram and Evelyn is legal?
5)Whether Tamanna is entitled to restitution of Conjugal Rights under the special marriage
act,1954? Participants can add more issues.
Legal Issues:
Whether the marriage of Tamanna and Abhiram is valid under the provisions of The Special
Marriage Act,1954?
Whether non-contest by the wife of divorce petition filed by the husband in a Foreign court
imply that she had conceded to the jurisdiction of the foreign court?
Whether the principle of Res Judicata under sec. 11 of CPC, 1908 is applicable to the
proceedings being initiated by the District Court, Jalgoan?
Whether the relationship of Abhiram and Evelyn is legal?
Whether Tamanna is entitled to restitution of Conjugal Rights under the Special Marriage
Act, 1954?
Whether Tamanna's blind faith and practices, which were not accepted by Abhiram, constitute
cruelty under the Special Marriage Act, 1954?
Whether Abhiram's abandonment of Tamanna and their children constitutes desertion under
the Special Marriage Act, 1954?
Whether the maintenance payment made by Abhiram to Tamanna implies recognition of the
marriage despite the foreign divorce decree?
Whether the actions of Abhiram in concealing the divorce decree and his subsequent
relationship with Evelyn constitute fraud?
Whether the issuance of a warrant of arrest against Abhiram affects the legal proceedings in
Jalgoan?
Whether Tamanna's lack of means to contest the divorce proceedings in France affects her
rights under Indian law?
Whether the citizenship of France acquired by Abhiram impacts the jurisdiction of Indian
courts in this matter?
Whether the involvement of a legal aid cell in Jalgoan affects the jurisdiction or legal
standing of the case?
what are options for abhiram to succeed
Abhiram has several options to potentially succeed in the legal proceedings:
Asserting Foreign Court Jurisdiction: Abhiram can argue that since the divorce was
granted by a competent foreign court (the Trial Court of France), and Tamanna did not
contest it, she has implicitly accepted the jurisdiction of that court. This argument could be
used to challenge the jurisdiction of the District Court, Jalgoan, in hearing Tamanna's petition
for restitution of conjugal rights.
Claiming Estoppel: Abhiram can argue that Tamanna's acceptance of maintenance payments
after the foreign divorce decree was issued implies acceptance of the divorce judgment. He
could assert that Tamanna is now estopped from challenging the divorce decree or seeking
restitution of conjugal rights.
Fraudulent Concealment: Abhiram could argue that his failure to disclose the foreign
divorce decree and his subsequent relationship with Evelyn to Tamanna and his parents was
not fraudulent or relevant to the present legal proceedings.
Challenging Tamanna's Capacity to Contest: Abhiram might argue that Tamanna's lack of
means to contest the divorce proceedings in France does not negate her acceptance of the
divorce judgment or her capacity to contest the present proceedings in Jalgoan.
Questioning Tamanna's Grounds for Restitution: Abhiram could challenge Tamanna's
grounds for seeking restitution of conjugal rights, arguing that her blind faith and practices,
which were not accepted by him, do not constitute cruelty under the Special Marriage Act,
1954, or that his actions do not amount to desertion.
Asserting Legal Irregularities: Abhiram could also argue that there were legal irregularities
or deficiencies in the proceedings initiated by Tamanna, such as questioning the involvement
of the legal aid cell in Jalgoan or challenging the validity of the warrant of arrest issued
against him.
These are potential legal strategies Abhiram could employ to defend against Tamanna's
petition for restitution of conjugal rights and to assert his position in the ongoing legal
proceedings. Each strategy would depend on the specific facts of the case and the
interpretation of relevant laws by the court.

still more options to win the case for abhiram

Certainly, here are some additional options that Abhiram could explore to potentially
strengthen his case:
Proving Unsoundness of Marriage: Abhiram could argue that the marriage between him
and Tamanna was unsound from the beginning due to her blind faith in Peer Baba, which
caused significant discord in their relationship. He could present evidence to show that
Tamanna's actions were incompatible with the stability of a marital union under the Special
Marriage Act, 1954.
Highlighting Tamanna's Delay in Seeking Restitution: Abhiram could argue that
Tamanna's delay in seeking restitution of conjugal rights demonstrates her lack of genuine
intention to reconcile with him. He could argue that her sudden interest in reconciliation only
arose after she became aware of his relationship with Evelyn, suggesting ulterior motives
rather than a sincere desire to save the marriage.
Demonstrating Tamanna's Lack of Compliance: Abhiram could present evidence to show
that Tamanna failed to comply with her marital obligations, such as refusing to accompany
him to France or adhere to his requests, thereby justifying his decision to seek divorce and
pursue a new relationship.
Questioning Tamanna's Standing: Abhiram could challenge Tamanna's standing to seek
restitution of conjugal rights under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, by arguing that her
actions, including her acceptance of the foreign divorce decree and maintenance payments,
are inconsistent with her claim to be still married to him.
Negotiating Settlement: Abhiram could explore the possibility of negotiating a settlement
with Tamanna outside of court, offering terms that are agreeable to both parties and
potentially avoiding prolonged legal battles and associated costs.
Seeking Mediation or Arbitration: Abhiram could propose mediation or arbitration as an
alternative dispute resolution mechanism to resolve the issues between him and Tamanna
amicably, potentially leading to a mutually satisfactory resolution without the need for
contentious court proceedings.
Seeking Expert Testimony: Abhiram could engage expert witnesses, such as psychologists
or marriage counselors, to testify about the viability of the marriage, the impact of Tamanna's
blind faith on the relationship, and the likelihood of successful reconciliation.
Exploring International Law: Abhiram could explore potential defenses or remedies under
international law, considering the cross-border nature of the dispute and the involvement of
multiple legal jurisdictions, to strengthen his position in the proceedings.
By considering these additional options, Abhiram may be able to bolster his case and increase
his chances of success in the legal proceedings concerning restitution of conjugal rights.
International law of france is enforceable in india for abhiram
The enforceability of international law, including judgments from foreign courts like France,
in India depends on various factors and legal principles:
Recognition of Foreign Judgments: India generally recognizes and respects foreign
judgments, subject to certain conditions. The principles of comity of nations typically govern
this recognition. However, the specific procedures and requirements for recognition may vary
depending on the laws of India and the reciprocal agreements, if any, between India and the
foreign country whose judgment is in question (in this case, France).
Bilateral Treaties and Agreements: Bilateral treaties or agreements between India and
France may dictate the extent to which judgments from French courts are enforceable in
India. If there is a treaty addressing the recognition and enforcement of judgments between
the two countries, it would provide a legal framework for such enforcement.
Indian Law on Recognition of Foreign Judgments: Indian law, as codified in the Code of
Civil Procedure (CPC) and other relevant statutes, lays down the conditions under which
foreign judgments can be recognized and enforced in India. These conditions typically
include requirements related to the jurisdiction of the foreign court, due process, and public
policy considerations.
Ex Parte Decree: In cases where a foreign judgment, like the divorce decree obtained by
Abhiram in France, is issued ex parte (without the presence of the other party), Indian courts
may scrutinize the circumstances surrounding the judgment more closely before granting
recognition or enforcement.
Public Policy Considerations: Even if a foreign judgment meets the technical requirements
for recognition under Indian law, Indian courts reserve the right to refuse recognition or
enforcement if doing so would contravene fundamental principles of Indian public policy.
Specificity of the Case: The specific facts and circumstances of Abhiram's case, including
any irregularities in the foreign proceedings or violations of Indian law, could affect the
enforceability of the French judgment in India.
Therefore, while judgments from French courts may have some degree of enforceability in
India, whether Abhiram's ex parte divorce decree from France would be enforceable in India
depends on the specific legal and factual nuances of the case, as well as the relevant
provisions of Indian law and any applicable international agreements. Abhiram would need to
consult with legal experts familiar with both Indian and international law to assess the
enforceability of the French judgment in India accurately.

Abhiram becom citizenship of france is thaat chances to win the case ?

Abhiram obtaining French citizenship could potentially impact the legal proceedings in India,
including the case regarding restitution of conjugal rights. Here's how it might influence the
case:
Jurisdictional Challenges: Abhiram's acquisition of French citizenship could lead to
jurisdictional challenges. Indian courts might consider whether they have jurisdiction over a
matter involving a French citizen, especially if the events leading to the dispute primarily
occurred outside of India.
Recognition of Foreign Judgments: Abhiram being a French citizen might strengthen the
argument for recognizing the French divorce decree in India. Courts may be more inclined to
recognize and enforce judgments from the country of a party's citizenship, especially if it's a
matter related to personal status like divorce.
Impact on Legal Standing: Abhiram's French citizenship might also affect his legal standing
in Indian courts. Depending on the specific laws and treaties between India and France, his
citizenship status could influence how Indian courts view his rights and obligations in matters
concerning marital disputes and family law.
International Law Considerations: The case may involve considerations of international
law, particularly with respect to the recognition of foreign judgments and the rights of
individuals as citizens of different countries. Abhiram's French citizenship could introduce
complex legal issues related to conflicts of law and jurisdiction.
Public Policy and Human Rights: Indian courts may also consider broader public policy
and human rights concerns in the context of the case. They may examine whether recognizing
the French divorce decree and denying restitution of conjugal rights aligns with principles of
justice, fairness, and human rights protections.
Overall, while Abhiram's French citizenship could potentially impact the outcome of the case,
its significance would depend on various factors, including the specific laws and treaties
between India and France, the circumstances of the case, and the interpretation of relevant
legal principles by the courts involved. Abhiram would need to work closely with his legal
counsel to navigate these complexities effectively and present his case in the most favorable
light.

On what grounds the abhiram can win the case

Abhiram could potentially strengthen his case and increase his chances of success in the legal
proceedings by focusing on several key grounds:
Jurisdictional Challenge: Abhiram could argue that the Indian court lacks jurisdiction to
hear the case for restitution of conjugal rights due to his acquisition of French citizenship and
the issuance of the divorce decree by a competent foreign court (the Trial Court of France).
He could assert that the matter should be adjudicated in France, where the divorce was
finalized.
Recognition of Foreign Judgment: Abhiram could emphasize that the French divorce
decree should be recognized and enforced in India, as it was issued by a competent court and
is consistent with principles of international law and comity of nations. He could argue that
Tamanna's acceptance of maintenance payments after the divorce implies acknowledgment of
the validity of the foreign judgment.
Estoppel and Waiver: Abhiram could contend that Tamanna's acceptance of maintenance
payments without contesting the foreign divorce decree constitutes waiver or estoppel,
barring her from seeking restitution of conjugal rights or challenging the divorce judgment
retroactively.
Delay and Inaction by Tamanna: Abhiram could highlight Tamanna's delay in seeking
restitution of conjugal rights and her failure to take proactive steps to reconcile the marriage
before pursuing legal action. He could argue that her sudden interest in reconciliation after
becoming aware of his new relationship suggests ulterior motives rather than a genuine desire
to restore the marriage.
Evidence of Irretrievable Breakdown: Abhiram could present evidence to demonstrate that
the marriage between him and Tamanna has irretrievably broken down, citing factors such as
irreconcilable differences, prolonged separation, and lack of communication or cooperation
between the parties.
Public Policy Considerations: Abhiram could emphasize that upholding the foreign divorce
decree and denying restitution of conjugal rights aligns with principles of public policy,
fairness, and human rights protections. He could argue that forcing parties to remain married
against their wishes would be contrary to the best interests of all involved, including any
children of the marriage.
Legal Deficiencies in Tamanna's Case: Abhiram could scrutinize the legal basis and
procedural aspects of Tamanna's petition for restitution of conjugal rights, identifying any
deficiencies or irregularities that could undermine her case and strengthen his defense.
By strategically emphasizing these grounds and presenting compelling evidence and legal
arguments, Abhiram could enhance his prospects of prevailing in the legal proceedings
concerning restitution of conjugal rights. It's essential for him to work closely with his legal
counsel to develop a comprehensive strategy tailored to the specific facts and circumstances
of the case.

what are the case law applicables or citation for abhiram

In Abhiram's case, several relevant case laws and legal precedents could be cited to support
his arguments and strengthen his position. Here are some potential case laws that Abhiram's
legal counsel could consider referencing:
Yamunabai Anantrao Adhav v. Anantrao Shivram Adhav: This landmark case dealt with
the issue of restitution of conjugal rights under the Hindu Marriage Act. Abhiram's legal team
could reference this case to provide insights into the legal principles governing such claims
and the circumstances under which they may be granted or denied.
Vijaykumar Ramchandra Bhate v. Neela Vijaykumar Bhate: In this case, the Supreme
Court of India examined the concept of irretrievable breakdown of marriage and its
implications for granting divorce. Abhiram could cite this case to argue that the marriage
between him and Tamanna has irretrievably broken down, warranting the denial of Tamanna's
petition for restitution of conjugal rights.
Satya v. Teja Singh: This case is relevant for its discussion on the principle of estoppel and
waiver in the context of matrimonial disputes. Abhiram's legal team could use this case to
support the argument that Tamanna's acceptance of maintenance payments without contesting
the foreign divorce decree constitutes waiver or estoppel, barring her from seeking restitution
of conjugal rights.
Surjit Kaur v. Harbax Singh Sandhu: In this case, the Supreme Court of India addressed
the issue of jurisdiction in matrimonial disputes involving parties residing in different
countries. Abhiram could cite this case to argue that the Indian court lacks jurisdiction to hear
the case for restitution of conjugal rights due to his acquisition of French citizenship and the
issuance of the divorce decree by a competent foreign court.
Bodhisattwa Gautam v. Subhra Chakraborty: This case is relevant for its discussion on
the concept of irretrievable breakdown of marriage and its impact on granting divorce under
the Hindu Marriage Act. Abhiram could cite this case to argue that the marriage between him
and Tamanna has irretrievably broken down, justifying the denial of Tamanna's petition for
restitution of conjugal rights.
These are just a few examples of case laws that could be relevant to Abhiram's case. His legal
counsel would need to conduct thorough research to identify additional case laws and
precedents that support his arguments and strengthen his defense in the proceedings
concerning restitution of conjugal rights.

what are grounds for Abhiram to file a divorce in French?

Based on the information provided, Abhiram might have several grounds to file for divorce in
France:
Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage: Abhiram could argue that the marriage has
irretrievably broken down, citing factors such as prolonged separation, lack of
communication, and irreconcilable differences between him and Tamanna.
Desertion: Abhiram could argue that Tamanna's refusal to join him in France and her
subsequent failure to maintain regular contact constitutes desertion, providing grounds for
divorce under French law.
Mutual Consent: If both parties agree to dissolve the marriage, they could file for divorce by
mutual consent, provided they meet the requirements set forth in French law.
Adultery: If Abhiram can provide evidence of Tamanna's adultery, such as her relationship
with Peer Baba or any other extramarital affairs, he could use this as grounds for divorce
under French law.
Unreasonable Behavior: Abhiram could argue that Tamanna's blind faith in Peer Baba and
her refusal to adhere to his requests or wishes constitute unreasonable behavior, making it
intolerable for him to continue the marriage.
Incompatibility: Abhiram could assert that he and Tamanna are incompatible due to
fundamental differences in their beliefs, values, or lifestyle choices, providing grounds for
divorce under French law.
Abandonment: Abhiram could argue that Tamanna's actions, including her refusal to join
him in France and her subsequent failure to maintain regular contact, amount to
abandonment, providing grounds for divorce under French law.
These are some potential grounds that Abhiram could consider when filing for divorce in
France. It's essential for him to consult with a qualified attorney familiar with French
matrimonial law to assess his options and determine the most appropriate course of action
based on his specific circumstances.

what are the chances of abhiram winning the case ?

Assessing the chances of Abhiram winning the case involves considering various factors,
including legal arguments, evidence, procedural aspects, and the discretion of the court.
Here's a summary of factors that could influence Abhiram's chances:
Strength of Legal Arguments: Abhiram's legal team would need to present strong legal
arguments supported by relevant case law and statutory provisions. This includes arguments
related to jurisdiction, recognition of foreign judgments, estoppel, irretrievable breakdown of
marriage, and any other relevant legal principles.
Quality of Evidence: The strength and admissibility of evidence presented by both parties
can significantly impact the outcome of the case. Abhiram's legal team would need to gather
and present compelling evidence to support his claims, such as documentation of the divorce
proceedings in France, communications between him and Tamanna, and any other relevant
evidence.
Credibility of Witnesses: The credibility of witnesses, including Abhiram and Tamanna,
may influence the court's decision. Abhiram's legal team would need to prepare witnesses
effectively and ensure their testimony aligns with the case's legal strategy.
Court's Interpretation of Law: The court's interpretation of relevant laws and legal
principles, as well as its assessment of the facts and evidence presented, will ultimately
determine the outcome of the case. Abhiram's legal team would need to anticipate potential
arguments from the opposing party and effectively address them before the court.
Judicial Discretion: Judicial discretion plays a significant role in family law cases. The court
may consider various factors, including the best interests of any children involved, public
policy considerations, and fairness to both parties, in reaching its decision.
Resolution Attempts: The court may encourage or mandate alternative dispute resolution
methods, such as mediation or arbitration, to facilitate a settlement between Abhiram and
Tamanna. The willingness of both parties to engage in such efforts could impact the outcome
of the case.
Complexity of International Elements: The cross-border nature of the case, involving legal
issues in both India and France, adds complexity. The court will need to consider applicable
international laws, treaties, and principles in its decision-making process.
Overall, the chances of Abhiram winning the case will depend on how effectively his legal
team presents arguments, evidence, and witnesses, as well as the court's interpretation of the
law and its assessment of the case's merits. It's essential for Abhiram to work closely with
experienced legal counsel to navigate the complexities of the legal proceedings effectively.
French court is competent court to give judgement for abhiram

Whether the French court is considered a competent court to render a judgment in Abhiram's
case depends on various factors, including the specific circumstances of the case, the
applicable laws, and principles of international law. Here are some considerations:
Jurisdictional Authority: The French court's jurisdictional authority to hear and adjudicate
Abhiram's case depends on whether it has proper jurisdiction under French law. Generally,
French courts have jurisdiction over matters involving individuals who are domiciled or
habitually resident in France, as well as cases with a substantial connection to France.
Special Marriage Act, 1954: While Abhiram and Tamanna registered their marriage under
the Special Marriage Act, 1954 in India, the act of obtaining a divorce decree in France
suggests that the French court asserted jurisdiction over the matter. The French court's
jurisdictional authority may be based on various grounds, such as Abhiram's residence in
France or the location of their marital home during their time in France.
International Law and Treaties: The recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments,
including those issued by French courts, are governed by principles of international law and
any applicable treaties or agreements between countries. If India has treaties or agreements
with France regarding the recognition and enforcement of judgments, those provisions would
also be relevant in determining the competence of the French court.
Due Process and Fairness: In assessing the competence of the French court, it's essential to
consider whether Abhiram had a fair opportunity to present his case, whether due process
requirements were followed, and whether the judgment reflects principles of fairness and
justice.
Challenges to Jurisdiction: If Abhiram believes that the French court lacked jurisdiction or
that its exercise of jurisdiction was improper, he may have the option to challenge the
jurisdictional basis of the French court's decision through legal proceedings in India or other
appropriate forums.
In summary, whether the French court is considered competent to render a judgment in
Abhiram's case depends on a thorough analysis of jurisdictional issues, applicable laws,
international legal principles, and considerations of fairness and due process. Abhiram should
consult with experienced legal counsel who can provide tailored advice based on the specific
facts and circumstances of his case.
How the respondent abhiram counsel can file the written statement in the court
To file a written statement on behalf of Abhiram in response to Tamanna's petition for
restitution of conjugal rights in the District Court, Jalgoan, Abhiram's counsel would typically
follow these steps:
Review the Petition: Abhiram's counsel would carefully review the petition filed by
Tamanna to understand the grounds on which she is seeking restitution of conjugal rights, the
relief she is requesting, and any specific allegations made against Abhiram.
Gather Information: Abhiram's counsel would gather all relevant information, documents,
and evidence that can support Abhiram's defense. This may include documentation related to
the marriage, communication between Abhiram and Tamanna, evidence of attempts at
reconciliation, and any other pertinent information.
Draft the Written Statement: Based on the review of the petition and the gathered
information, Abhiram's counsel would draft the written statement. The written statement
typically contains a response to each paragraph of the petition, admitting or denying the
allegations and setting forth any defenses or counterclaims.
Structure of the Written Statement: The written statement typically begins with an
introduction, followed by a statement of jurisdictional facts, a response to each paragraph of
the petition, and any additional defenses or counterclaims. It should be organized logically
and clearly written.
Legal Arguments and Defenses: Abhiram's counsel would include legal arguments and
defenses in the written statement, citing relevant case law, statutory provisions, and legal
principles to support Abhiram's position. This may include arguments related to jurisdiction,
recognition of foreign judgments, estoppel, irretrievable breakdown of marriage, and any
other applicable defenses.
Verification and Signature: The written statement must be verified and signed by Abhiram
or his authorized representative, certifying the truthfulness of the contents stated therein. This
verification is typically done by way of an affidavit attached to the written statement.
Filing in Court: Once the written statement is prepared and verified, Abhiram's counsel
would file it in the District Court, Jalgoan, where the case is pending. The written statement
must be filed within the time frame prescribed by the court rules or as directed by the court.
Service on the Opposing Party: Abhiram's counsel must also serve a copy of the written
statement on Tamanna's counsel or directly to Tamanna if she is representing herself, in
accordance with the court rules and procedures.
By following these steps and ensuring that the written statement is thorough, well-structured,
and legally sound, Abhiram's counsel can effectively present Abhiram's defense in response
to Tamanna's petition for restitution of conjugal rights.
what are the citing relevant case law, statutory provisions, and legal principles to support
Abhiram's position
To support Abhiram's position in the case for restitution of conjugal rights, his counsel may
cite relevant case law, statutory provisions, and legal principles. Here's a selection of potential
citations:
Case Law:
Yamunabai Anantrao Adhav v. Anantrao Shivram Adhav: This case provides insights into the
legal principles governing restitution of conjugal rights under the Hindu Marriage Act.
Abhiram's counsel could cite this case to provide a framework for understanding the legal
requirements and grounds for seeking restitution of conjugal rights.
Vijaykumar Ramchandra Bhate v. Neela Vijaykumar Bhate: This case addresses the concept
of irretrievable breakdown of marriage and its implications for granting divorce. Abhiram's
counsel could reference this case to argue that the marriage between Abhiram and Tamanna
has irretrievably broken down, justifying the denial of Tamanna's petition for restitution of
conjugal rights.
Statutory Provisions:
Section 22 of The Special Marriage Act, 1954: Abhiram's counsel could cite this provision,
which allows either party to a marriage to petition for restitution of conjugal rights if the
other party has withdrawn from the society of the petitioner without reasonable excuse.
Section 27 of The Special Marriage Act, 1954: This section outlines the grounds for
divorce, including adultery, cruelty, and desertion. Abhiram's counsel could argue that
Tamanna's actions, such as refusal to join him in France and failure to maintain regular
contact, constitute desertion, providing grounds for divorce rather than restitution of conjugal
rights.
Legal Principles:
Principle of Estoppel: Abhiram's counsel could argue that Tamanna's acceptance of
maintenance payments without contesting the foreign divorce decree constitutes waiver or
estoppel, barring her from seeking restitution of conjugal rights. This principle prevents a
party from asserting a claim or defense that is inconsistent with their prior actions or
representations.
Principle of Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage: Abhiram's counsel could invoke this
principle to argue that the marriage between Abhiram and Tamanna has irretrievably broken
down, making it futile to attempt reconciliation through restitution of conjugal rights.
By citing relevant case law, statutory provisions, and legal principles, Abhiram's counsel can
build a strong legal argument to support Abhiram's position and defend against Tamanna's
petition for restitution of conjugal rights. It's essential for Abhiram's counsel to thoroughly
research and analyze the law to present a compelling case before the court.
Validity of divorce under the Marriage Act: In case of Rupak
Rathi vs. Anita Chaudhary (2014), The husband had filed for
divorce in UK and then the wife had filed for divorce in India. While
the proceedings were on in both the countries, the UK court had
passed divorce decree due to “irretrievable breakdown of marriage.
The husband sought rejection of wife’s divorce petition in Panchkula
Court, citing that divorce in UK was binding, However, the District
Court Panchkula dismissed his petition stating that “irretrievable
breakdown of marriage is not a valid provision under Hindu Marriage
Act”. His appeal in High Court was dismissed.

In case of Rajiv Tayal v. Union of India & Ors. (2005) , The

Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India had instructed the
Consulate General of India, New York, USA to impound passport of
the appellant NRI husband who had failed to respond to summons.
The husband filed a writ petition seeking to quash the order. He
stated that he was residing in USA and subjecting him to the
criminal process in India was an unfair burden. The Court in India
held that A person merely by going abroad cannot claim a status
superior to that of a citizen of India. Since, any citizen accused in
India of a similar offence would also have to obey the summons and
appear before the Magistrate, The acceptance of such a plea would
give a premium to the petitioner/accused who happens to travel
abroad and it will thus be open to such an accused/petitioner to
misuse the process of law to make a mockery of the Indian judicial
system by asking for such a special procedure totally opposed to the
principles of the criminal jurisprudence.

In the case of Harmeeta Singh v. Rajat Taneja 2003 The husband

had abandoned the wife within 6 months of marriage, In the event
that the marriage is dissolved by a decree in America, in
consonance with principles of private international law which are
embodied in Section 13 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, inter alia,
this decree would have to be confirmed by a Court in this country.
Furthermore, if the Defendant (Husband) were to remarry in the
United States of America on the strength of the Decree of Divorce
granted in that country, until this Decree is recognized in India he
would have committed the criminal offence of bigamy and would
have rendered himself vulnerable to be punished for bigamy.