SHALU OJHA Vs. PRASHANT OJHA
LAWS(SC)-2014-9-57
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: DELHI)
Decided on September 18,2014

Shalu Ojha Appellant
VERSUS
Prashant Ojha Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES LTD VS. MUSIC BROADCAST PVT LTD [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

NISHANT KRISHAN YADAV VS. STATE OF U P AND ANR [LAWS(ALL)-2016-1-367] [REFERRED]
S VS. J [LAWS(DLH)-2018-4-531] [REFERRED TO]
DINESH KUMAR YADAV VS. STATE OF U.P. & ANR. [LAWS(ALL)-2016-8-15] [REFERRED]
RAM AVTAR PRASAD AND 5 OTHERS VS. STATE OF U P AND ANOTHER [LAWS(ALL)-2015-11-263] [REFERRED]
DINESH KUMAR YADAV VS. STATE OF U.P. & ANR. [LAWS(ALL)-2016-10-70] [REFERRED TO]
JAVED KHAN VS. SABA [LAWS(MPH)-2020-11-108] [REFERRED TO]
SABINA SAHDEV & ORS VS. VIDUR SAHDEV [LAWS(DLH)-2018-7-174] [REFERRED TO]
YASHASWINI VS. M. ANEGUDDE GANESH [LAWS(KAR)-2016-1-167] [REFERRED TO]
J. SHYAM BABU VS. STATE OF TELANGANA [LAWS(APH)-2017-2-57] [REFERRED TO]
NILESHKUMAR BHARATBHAI PANDYA & ORS VS. JIGNABEN NILESHKUMAR PANDYA & ANR [LAWS(GJH)-2016-7-350] [REFERRED]
SARDAR JOGENDRA SINGH AND ORS. VS. JAL VIDYUT AWAS EVAM VIKAS SAHKARI SAMITI LTD. AND ORS. [LAWS(UTN)-2015-9-46] [REFERRED TO]
BHANU KIRAN VS. RAHUL KHOSLA [LAWS(P&H)-2023-2-122] [REFERRED TO]
VINOD PATEL AND FOUR OTHERS VS. KOMAL AND THREE OTHERS [LAWS(MPH)-2018-4-432] [REFERRED TO]
SMT K.M.LEELAVATHI VS. K.M.SONIA MADAIAH [LAWS(KAR)-2020-6-20] [REFERRED TO]
DR. PARIJAT VINOD KANETKAR VS. MRS. MALIKA PARIJAT KANETKAR [LAWS(BOM)-2016-12-91] [REFERRED TO]
SMT. SANGITA TIWARI (PANDEY) VS. DIGAMBARNATH PANDEY [LAWS(CHH)-2016-2-26] [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL AUTOMOBILES VS. INDIAN OIL CORPN. LTD. AND ORS. [LAWS(RAJ)-2015-7-112] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. DR. MAROTI S/O KASHINATH PIMPALKAR [LAWS(SC)-2022-11-1] [REFERRED TO]
SUMITHRA VS. B.S. SUDHIR [LAWS(KAR)-2020-11-313] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)Leave granted.
(2.)This is an unfortunate case where the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 are rendered simply a pious hope of the Parliament and a teasing illusion for the appellant.
(3.)The appellant is a young woman who got married to the respondent on 20.04.2007 in Delhi according to Hindu rites and customs, pursuant to certain information placed by the respondent on the website known as "Sycorian Matrimonial Services Ltd.".


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.