Disposed

Smt.Sunita Toppo v. Nirmal Toppo

Chhattisgarh HC20 Jul 2022FA/90/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a matrimonial appeal, the appellant alleged the respondent had married second and lived separately for 20 years. Finding no instructions from the respondent, the court disposed of the appeal with an observation that the adverse trial finding would not affect the appellant's service career.

What did the court decide?

The appeal disposed of with an observation that the adverse finding against the Appellant shall not affect her service career.

Smt.Sunita Toppo Vs Nirmal Toppo — Matrimonial and Divorce | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR First Appeal No. 90 of 2006

¶3

Smt. Sunita Toppo, W/o Shri Nirmal Toppo, D/o Shri Romanus Bara, aged about 30 years, Caste-Uraon, R/o Village Semardih, Tahsil Bagicha, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.

¶4

Present Address- Plot No.24, Street No.6, Sector-B, Panchsheel Society, Madhuban Nagar, Borsi, District Durg (C.G.)

¶5

---- Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Nirmal Toppo, S/o Shri Jwakim Toppo, R/o Village Bahora, Tahsil Bagicha, District Jashpur (C.G.).

¶8

Present Address-Qr. No.16/A, Street No.38, Sector-4, Bhilai, District Durg(C.G.)

¶9

---- Respondent

¶10

For Appellant	: Mr. Ashish Shrivastava, Senior
	Advocate with Mr. Rohishek Verma, Advocate.
For Respondent	: Mr. A.K. Prasad, Advocate.

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel

¶12

Order On Board

¶13

20/07/2022

¶14

Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant/wife submits that the Respondent/husband has already performed second marriage and is residing with his second wife. He further submits that the Appellant and the Respondent are residing separately for last more than 20 years and there is no possibility of settlement between them and there is no dues left between them. He further submits that this appeal may be disposed of with an observation that the adverse finding made by the Trial Court against the

¶15

Appellant/wife may not affect her service career.

¶16

Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent/husband submits that he has no instructions from the Respondent and, therefore, he is not aware of the facts submitted by the learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant/wife.

¶17

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made above, the prayer made by learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Appellant/wife appears to be genuine. Hence, the instant appeal is disposed of with an observation that the adverse finding recorded by the Trial Court against the Appellant/wife shall not affect her service career.

¶18

Sd/( Arvind Singh Chandel ) Judge

¶19

Shubham

Smt.Sunita Toppo v. Nirmal Toppo

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Sunita Toppo v. Nirmal Toppo

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Case details

Similar cases

Kashiram Vs Bhupendra And Anr.

Vijay Agrawal, Vs Lalit Agrawal

Dhananjay Verma @ Dhannu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Champa Bai Vs Leelamoti

Tularam Vs Milapa Bai And Ors.

Rajendra Singh Bajwa Vs Satish Minocha And Ors.