The court decreed a suit for divorce by mutual consent under the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936, granting the petitioners' prayer to dissolve their marriage after determining the separation terms. The judgment allowed the suit based on mutual agreement.
The suit was decreed granting divorce by mutual consent.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
:1:
IN THE PARSI CHIEF MATRIMONIAL COURT AT BOMBAY
PARSI SUIT NO. 31 OF 2006
Mr. Sheriar Dady Daruwalla. .. Plaintiff No.1.
and
Mrs. Roshni Sheriar Daruwalla. .. Plaintiff No.2.
Mrs. Armaity S. Khushrushahi for the Plaintiffs.
CORAM : DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,J.
1ST DECEMBER, 2006.
P.C. :
| 1. | T | his suit has been filed under Section 32-B o | f the | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parsi | Marriage | and Divorce Act, 1936 |
for | divorce | by |
mutual |
| consent. | P |
arties were married on |
15th | F |
ebruary | 1985 |
| accordin | g to |
Parsi Zoroastrian rites |
and | custom | s. | The |
| First | and | Second Plaintiffs have a |
daughter | who | was | born |
| on | 31st |
December 1985 and who ha |
s now |
attain | ed | majority. |
| Serious | di | fferences arose between the |
parti |
es in |
199 |
2 and |
| since | 9th | November 1996, they ha |
ve | resided | separately. | |
| Parties | have | arrived at Consent te |
rms un |
der | which | the |
| First | Plaintiff | has agreed to pay a |
lump | sum | alimony | of |
| Rs.3.00 | lacs | to the Second Plaintif |
f and |
a | n | additional |
| amount | of | Rs.2.00 lacs to cover the |
cost | of e |
ducation | of |
| the | daughter. | Two Pay Orders have |
acco |
rdingly | been | handed |
| over | in | the Court today by the |
First | Plaintiff | to | the |
Second Plaintiff. The Second Plaintiff is employed with
Associated Cement Companies and is gainfully employed.
:2:
| their | affida | vits in |
lieu | of | the | examinatio | n in |
chief | and |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| are | present | before | the | Co |
urt. | Both | the | parties | have |
| stated | before | the C |
ourt | that | they | have | applied | for | divorce |
by mutual consent voluntarily and that there has been no
coercion, force, fraud or undue influence.
in particular, considering the position that parties have resided separately since 1996, I am of the view that there
is no reason why a divorce by mutual consent should not be
granted.
decreed in terms of prayer Clauses (a) and (b).
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a divorce by mutual consent should be granted given the parties have resided separately since 1996.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
