Divorce,Fraud,Marriage law
Fraud as a ground for Divorce
30 Mar 2016  |  Views: 36  | 
Tanushree Sharma

UnderIndian marriage laws, a marriage can be put aside if the assent for it wassecured by extortion or distortion of certainties. This is not all that simpleto demonstrate. Nonetheless, it must be noticed that misrepresentation is notcharacterized in the Indian marriage laws. Along these lines, any kind ofmisrepresentation can't be taken as a ground for marital alleviation.


Indian Marriage Laws:Statutory Provisions

UnderIndian marriage laws, the Hindu Marriage Act empowers a candidate to keep awayfrom a marriage if the assent was gotten by power or extortion, as specified inarea 12(1)(c).


Themisrepresentation must be:

•           In connection to the way of thefunction.

•           In connection to any situationconcerning the inverse party.

Onecan't take misrepresentation as a ground for separation if the extortion wasfound a year prior to documenting the case. Likewise, if the gatherings havebeen co-habiting after the information of extortion, the solicitor can't takeit as a ground for wedding help.

Before1976, one could evade a marriage just if the assent was gotten bymisrepresentation and the execution of wedding service is the real time tolearn, under s 12(1). In the event that the service of marriage had occurredwith the readiness and assent of the candidate, then s/he can't look forinvalidation of such marriage on the ground of misrepresentation.


Indian Marriage Laws:Fraud Committed During Agreement to Marriage

Indianmarriage laws are deciphered in question by considering the quirks of thegatherings to the debate. In Rasiklal v Sulochana (1967) ILR Guj 822, 851, itwas announced that extortion submitted amid consent to marriage (countingpromise) couldn't be taken as a ground to stay away from marriage by thetroubled party. Likewise, the nature of extortion under which the candidatecould look for alleviation couldn't go past duplicity with regards to thefunctions of marriage or the personality of the individual (preceding 1976).

Upvotes: 0  |  Downvotes: 0  | 


Login to comment