LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

STRONG MAN (mr)     22 October 2012

What's next

Dear Law Experts

                                To continue further my pendency in dvc case i have given talaq to my wife that is triple pronouncement of talak from qazzat because that lady is rejecting the talaq send by my councel in three subsequent session as per the terms of talak and SC guidelines vexed by this my councel advised to proceed through qazzat and i proceeded as per the advice and submitted it to wakf board for granting of talak after verification.I was issued talak certificate from wakf board and it was submitted in the court in the dv proceeding the opposite councel has objected to the talak saying it is not proper way but the judge has accepted the petition.my lawyer is saying now that the opposite party does not have a chance to aurgue on talak .next date is given on 2nd nov for final aurgument on DVC only 

my question is what will happen to my DVC what type of judgement can i expect and what are the options for the judge to pronounce judgement   FURTHER I WILL UPDATE ON THE NEXT SESSION OF MY COURT PROCEEDINGS YOUR VALUABLE ANSWERS ARE ALWAYS WELCOMED.



Learning

 1 Replies

Tajobsindia (Senior Partner )     22 October 2012

1. The Hon’ble SC has reiterated many a times that personal laws of an individual are not subject to Part III of the Constitution. In Krishna Singh v. Mathura Ahir [(1981) 3 SCC 689], the court upheld the same and further urged them to enforce the law from recognized and authoritative sources of Hindu Law. Later in Maharishi Avdhesh v. Union of India [1994 Supp (1) SCC 713], a challenge on the Muslim Women (Protection of Women on Divorce) Act, 1986 had been denied stating that even codified personal law cannot be tested on the touchstone of fundamental rights. Later in Ahmedabad Women’s Action Group v. Union of India [(1997) 3 SCC 573], the court held that it cannot interfere with personal laws as they are a matter of STATE policy.

2. The benefits conferred beyond the period of IDDAT are averse to Art. 25 COI shoudl be the argument to reject prayed Protection orders.


3. If valid reason was given with asking for her consent and did have a date and there is a mention of meher and iddat period then it is valid talaq is my view.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register