{"id":271301,"date":"1992-03-24T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1992-03-23T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992"},"modified":"2019-03-12T20:42:36","modified_gmt":"2019-03-12T15:12:36","slug":"anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992","title":{"rendered":"Anita Laxmi Narayan Singh vs Laxmi Narain Singh on 24 March, 1992"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Anita Laxmi Narayan Singh vs Laxmi Narain Singh on 24 March, 1992<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1992 AIR 1148, 1992 SCR (2) 316<\/div>\n
Author: Ahmadi<\/div>\n
Bench: Ahmadi, A.M. (J)<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nANITA LAXMI NARAYAN SINGH\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nLAXMI NARAIN SINGH\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT24\/03\/1992\n\nBENCH:\nAHMADI, A.M. (J)\nBENCH:\nAHMADI, A.M. (J)\nVENKATACHALLIAH, M.N. (J)\nJEEVAN REDDY, B.P. (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1992 AIR 1148\t\t  1992 SCR  (2) 316\n 1992 SCC  (2) 562\t  JT 1992 (2)\t349\n 1992 SCALE  (1)722\n\n\nACT:\nHindu Marriage Act<\/a>, 1955 :\n     Section  13-Divorce<\/a>-Petition by husband at\t Bombay-Wife\nrequired  to travel a long distance to\tdefend\tproceedings-\nTransfer petition by wife-Supreme Court directing sufficient\nexpenses for wife's stay and travel expenses-Grant of meagre\namount of wife by Family Court-Consequent inability of\twife\nto  attend proceedings-Ex-parte divorce decree in favour  of\nhusband-Held  grant  of meagre amount of  wife\tresulted  in\ndenial of justice-Ex-parte decree of divorce set aside.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n     The  respondent was married to appellant at  Ghaziabad.\nHe filed a Divorce Petition at Bombay and the appellant-wife\nfiled  applications  for  maintenance and  expenses  of\t the\ndivorce\t proceedings.\tSubsequently she  filed\t a  Transfer\npetition in this Court for transferring the case from Bombay\nto Ghaziabad which was disposed by this Court directing that\n(i) the respondent-husband would pay Rs.2500 for wife's next\nvisit  to Bombay; and (ii) the Family Court would insist  on\nthe husband depositing the to and fro fare for the wife\t and\nher  companion and also an amount sufficient for their\tstay\nin  Bombay  on each visit.  The Family Court  dismissed\t the\nwife's\tapplication for interim maintenance and expenses  of\nproceedings  on the ground that she was\t gainfully  employed\nbut  awarded Rs. 700 as expenses and further  directed\tthat\nshe will be paid an additional amount of Rs. 150 per day  in\ncase  of her stay for more than one day at Bombay.   Against\nthis  order the appellant filed a Special Leave petition  in\nthis  Court.   Since she was held up for  attending  to\t her\npetition in this Court the Family Court granted an  ex-parte\ndecree\tof divorce to the husband.  She filed a petition  in\nthis  Court as she could not attend the Court on account  of\nher inability to meet the expenses for travel and  residence\nin Bombay.\n     Allowing the appeal, this Court,\n\t\t\t\t\t\t       317\n     HELD  :  1. While disposing  the  appellant's  Transfer\nPetition  this\tCourt had clearly directed that\t the  Family\nCourt will insist on the husband not only depositing the  to\nand  fro travel expenses for the wife and her companion\t but\nalso  an amount sufficient for their stay in Bombay on\teach\nvisit.\t But the Family Court has been far from just to\t the\nwife  who was required to travel a long distance  to  defend\nherself.   Nothing  has\t been allowed by  way  of  transport\ncharges and lodging and boarding charges even if she has not\nto stay for an additional day in Bombay. [320 D-F]\n     2. The interim order passed by the Family Court is\t for\nreasons\t best known to it, highly biased.  This is  more  so\nbecause this Court's order granting expenses to visit Bombay\nprovided sufficient guideline for determining the quantum of\nexpenses  to be awarded.  Besides the Family Court  has\t not\nawarded\t any amount to meet the cost of the  proceedings  on\nthe specious plea that the appellant is gainfully  employed.\nTo say the least the order is far from satisfactory and\t has\nresulted in gross denial of justice.  The impugned order  is\naccordingly set aside. [321 A-C]\n     3. As the interim order made it impossible for the wife\nto  contest  the divorce petition in the  Family  Court\t and\nfacilitated  an\t ex-parte divorce decree in  favour  of\t the\nhusband, in the extraordinary and peculiar circumstances  of\nthis case, the ex-parte divorce decree is set aside. [321 C-\nD]\n     4.\t Interest  of  justice\trequires  transfer  of\t the\nproceedings  from the Family Court, Bombay to  the  District\nCourt,\tGhaziabad.   The restored divorce  proceedings\twill\nstand  transferred from Family Court Bombay to the  District\nCourt, Ghaziabad. [321 E-F]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
     ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Interlocutory Application No. 4
\nof 1991 in Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 521 of 1990.\n<\/p>\n
     (Petition under Section 25 C.P.C.)
\n\t       WITH
\n     C.A. No. 1119 of 1992
\n\t       WITH
\n     C.A. No. 1118 of 1992
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t       318<\/span>
\n     Mrs. Sureshtha Bagga for the Appellant.\n<\/p>\n
     Vimal Dave for the Respondent.\n<\/p>\n
     The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\n     AHMADI,  J. Delay condoned.  Special leave\t granted  in
\nboth  matters.\t The facts leading to these  cases,  briefly
\nstated,\t are  that the appellant  Anita\t married  respondent
\nLaxmi  Narain on November 1, 1987 at Ghaziabad according  to
\nHindu  rites.  It is the appellant’s case that on  the\tvery
\nnext day at the Bidai ceremony the relatives of her  husband
\nraised\ta  dispute  regarding inadequacy  of  dowry  amount.
\nHowever,  that\tdispute was settled for the  time  being  by
\nrespected  persons but Anita was not happy at her  husband’s
\nhome  on  account of ill-treatment meted out to her  by\t the
\nrespondent.  Ultimately on March 11, 1988 she left  for\t her
\nfather’s  house\t in Ghaziabad and since then  she  has\tbeen
\nliving there.\n<\/p>\n
     The respondent sent a notice through his Advocate dated
\nNovember  16,  1988 and followed it up by filing  a  Divorce
\nPetition  under Section 13<\/a> of the Hindu Marriage Act in\t the
\nCity  Civil Court at Bombay.  On the appellant being  served
\nwith  the notice of the divorce petition she went to  Bombay
\nand entered an appearance and also filed an application\t for
\nmaintenance  pendente  lite.  Even thereafter  she  attended
\ncourt  on several adjournments but there was no progress  in
\nthe  matter.   On  October  3,\t1989  the  proceedings\twere
\ntransferred  to the Family Court at Bandra, Bombay, and\t the
\nappellant was informed about the same.\tThe appellant  filed
\na  complaint under Section 498A<\/a>, IPC<\/a> against the  respondent
\nat  Ghaziabad  on  December 13, 1989.\tThe  appellant\tpaid
\nseveral\t visits to Bombay to attend the divorce\t proceedings
\nin  the Family Court but the matter was only adjourned\tfrom
\ntime to time.  An effort was made by the Marriage Counsellor
\nof  the Family Court to bring about a settlement on May\t 22,
\n1990 but in vain.  Tired of making long trips from Ghaziabad
\nto  Bombay  the appellant preferred a Transfer\tPetition  in
\nthis  Court  for  transferring\tthe  case  from\t Bombay\t  to
\nGhaziabad wherein notice was issued and the respondent filed
\nhis counter.  The Transfer Petition was ultimately  disposed
\nof  by\tthis  Court’s order dates January 14,  1991  to\t the
\nfollowing effect :\n<\/p>\n
\t  “Since  the matter is pending in the Family  Court
\n\t in  which the petitioner herself has also filed  an
\n\t application bearing No. 4091\/89, We think it  would
\n\t be advisable to allow the Family
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t       319<\/span>
\n\t  Court to dispose of the matter expeditiously.\t The
\n\t ends of justice would suffice if we direct that  on
\n\t each  occasion\t the petitionerwife is\trequired  to
\n\t attend\t the  Family Court, the\t Family\t Court\twill
\n\t first\tinsist on the husband depositing the to\t and
\n\t fro  fare  for the petitioner and a  companion\t and
\n\t also an amount sufficient for their stay in  Bombay
\n\t on  each  visit.  For the next visit to  Bombay  we
\n\t direct the husband to deposit a sum of Rs. 2500  in
\n\t the  Family Court under notice to  the\t petitioner.
\n\t We also hope that the Family Court will  appreciate
\n\t the  difficulty of the petitioner-wife and  try  to
\n\t dispose of the matter and vacate the stay but\twith
\n\t liberty  to the petitioner-wife to move this  Court
\n\t in case of difficulty.”\n<\/p>\n
     It\t was  only  after this order  was  passed  that\t the
\nrespondent  filed his reply to the  appellant’s\t application
\nfor  grant of interim maintenance and cost  of\tproceedings.
\nAs  her first application was not taken up for\thearing\t she
\nfiled another application for payment of expenses, etc.\t The
\nFamily\t Court\t dismissed  her\t application   for   interim
\nmaintenance  and expenses of proceedings on the ground\tthat
\nshe was gainfully employed.  The only amount allowed by\t the
\nFamily\tCourt  was  Rs. 700  towards  second  class  sleeper
\nRailway\t fare  for herself and her  companion.\t The  Family
\nCourt  also  observed  that if she  and\t her  companion\t are
\nrequired  to stay in Bombay the respondent will pay Rs.\t 150
\nfor additional days.  After this order dated April 20,\t1991
\nthe appellant was directed to file her statement by May\t 20,
\n1991.\n<\/p>\n
     Feeling   aggrieved   by  this  order   the   appellant
\napproached  this  Court\t seeking  special  leave  to  appeal
\nagainst\t the said order.  She also filed I.A. No. 4 of\t1991
\nin  Transfer  Petition\tNo. 521\/90 in view  of\tthe  liberty
\nreserved  unto her by this Court’s order dated\tJanuary\t 14,
\n1991.\tIn the meantime the divorce proceedings were  listed
\nbefore\tthe  Family Court on September 23, 1991 and  as\t the
\nappellant  was\theld up for attending to her  special  leave
\npetition against the interim order she sought an adjournment
\nby  a letter sent through courier service on  September\t 21,
\n1991.  However that being a holiday the Family Court did not
\nhold  its  sitting but took up the matter on the  next\tday.
\nSince  the letter written by the appellant had\treached\t the
\nFamily\tCourt,\tthe  Family Court adjourned  the  matter  to
\nOctober\t 7, 1991 with a direction to obtain a stay from\t the
\nSupreme Court or else the matter
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t       320<\/span>
\nwould proceed.\tIntimation about the said order was sent  to
\nthe appellant at her old address even though her new address
\nwas   communicated  to\tthe  Family  Court   earlier.\t The
\nproceedings  were adjourned from October 7, 1991 to  October
\n11,  1991  and\tthereafter  to\tOctober\t 19,  1991   without
\nintimation  to the appellant.  The evidence was recorded  on
\nOctober 19, 1991 and the judgment was pronounced on  October
\n21, 1991 allowing the divorce petition and granting a decree
\nfor  divorce expert.  The appellant has preferred a  special
\nleave  petition against the said order granting\t divorce  on
\nthe  plea that she had been condemned unheard by the  Family
\nCourt  as she could not attend the court on account  of\t her
\ninability  to meet the expenses for travel and residence  in
\nBombay.\t These are the circumstances in which the  aforesaid
\nproceedings have arisen before this Court.\n<\/p>\n
     From  the facts set out above it is evident  that\tthis
\ncourt  did  not order transfer of the case because  it\tfelt
\nthat  the  Family  Court, Bombay, which was  seized  of\t the
\nmatter would be able to resolve the controversy at an  early
\ndate.  This Court had clearly directed that the Family Court
\nwill  insist on the husband not only depositing the  to\t and
\nfrom travel expenses for the wife and her companion but also
\nan amount sufficient for their stay in Bombay on each visit.
\nEven  according\t to the Family Court the second\t class\tfare
\nfrom Bombay Central to Delhi by mail train and from Delhi to
\nGhaziabad  comes  to Rs. 326 + Rs. 12 i.e. Rs. 338  for\t two
\npersons.   The Family Court, therefore, awarded Rs.  700  by
\nway  of\t expenses  and\tadded  that  she  will\tbe  paid  an
\nadditional amount of Rs. 150 per day if she has to stay\t for
\nmore  than one day.  To say the least, the Family Court\t has
\nbeen far from just to the wife who was required to travel  a
\nlong  distance\tfrom Ghaziabad to Bombay Central  to  defend
\nherself.   Nothing  has\t been allowed by  way  of  transport
\ncharges and lodging and boarding charges even if she has not
\nto  stay  for an additional day in Bombay.  Where  does\t the
\nFamily Court expect her to put up in Bombay after a 24\thour
\njourney\t ?   If the case is adjourned it  seems\t the  Family
\nCourt  expects her to leave on the same day  post-haste\t for
\nDelhi.\tEven on reaching Bombay after a tiring journey of 24
\nhours  she  is\tnot provided any expense  by  way  of  hotel
\ncharges,  lodge\t and board, for the day.   Does\t the  Family
\nCourt expect her to rush to Court from the station and\trush
\nback  to  station from the Court on  the  proceedings  being
\nadjourned  for the day?\t Even the meagre payment of Rs.\t 150
\nis made available to her if she has to stay in Bombay for an
\nadditional  day.  The Family Court, with respect,  also\t did
\nnot  realise  that it would be impossible to find  a  modest
\nliving place for two for Rs. 150 per day in a
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t       321<\/span>
\ncostly city like Bombay, leave aside the expense for  meals,
\netc.   It seems to us that the interim order passed  by\t the
\nFamily\tCourt  is,  for reasons best  known  to\t it,  highly
\nbiased.\t  This\tis  more so because it had  before  it\tthis
\nCourt’s order granting Rs. 2500 by way of expenses to  visit
\nBombay\twhich provided sufficient guideline for\t determining
\nthe quantum of expenses to be awarded.\tBesides, the  Family
\nCourt  has  not awarded any amount to meet the cost  of\t the
\nproceedings  on\t the  specious plea that  she  is  gainfully
\nemployed.    To\t say  the  least  the  order  is  far\tfrom
\nsatisfactory  and has resulted in gross denial\tof  justice.
\nThe  order  made  it impossible for the\t wife  to  meet\t the
\nexpenses of frequent visits to Bombay and facilitated an ex-
\nparte divorce decree in favour of the husband.\n<\/p>\n
     In\t the  result we allow the appeal and set  aside\t the
\nimpugned  order\t dated\t20th  April,  1991  passed  in\tM.J.
\nPetition No. 146 of 1989.  As the said order of 20th  April,
\n1991 made it impossible for the wife to contest the  divorce
\npetition  in  the Family Court and facilitated\tan  ex-parte
\ndivorce\t  decree   in  favour  of  the\t husband,   in\t the
\nextraordinary  and peculiar circumstances of this  case,  we
\nallow the appeal and set aside the ex-parte divorce decree.\n<\/p>\n
     Having  regard to the fact that the husband is  a\thigh
\nranking\t railway  officer who would be\tentitled  to  travel
\nfacilities,  we\t think in the backdrop of events  that\thave
\ntaken  place,  it  would be expedient  in  the\tinterest  of
\njustice\t of transfer the proceedings from the Family  Court,
\nBombay,\t to the District Court, Ghaziabad, for\tdisposal  in
\naccordance  with law, The restored divorce proceedings\twill
\nstand  transferred  to the District Court,  Ghaziabad.\t The
\nFamily Court, Bombay will forthwith transmit the record\t and
\nproceedings,  inclusive\t of  pending  interim\tapplications
\nincluding the one in which the impugned order of 20th April,
\n1991  came to be passed, to the District  Court,  Ghaziabad,
\nfor disposal in accordance with law.  The respondent-husband
\nwill pay the cost of the present three proceedings which  we
\nquantify at Rs. 5,000 (Rupees five thousand only).\n<\/p>\n
T.N.A.\t\t\t\t\t      Appeal allowed.\n\t\t\t\t\t\t       322<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Anita Laxmi Narayan Singh vs Laxmi Narain Singh on 24 March, 1992 Equivalent citations: 1992 AIR 1148, 1992 SCR (2) 316 Author: Ahmadi Bench: Ahmadi, A.M. (J) PETITIONER: ANITA LAXMI NARAYAN SINGH Vs. RESPONDENT: LAXMI NARAIN SINGH DATE OF JUDGMENT24\/03\/1992 BENCH: AHMADI, A.M. (J) BENCH: AHMADI, A.M. (J) VENKATACHALLIAH, M.N. (J) […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-271301","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nAnita Laxmi Narayan Singh vs Laxmi Narain Singh on 24 March, 1992 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Anita Laxmi Narayan Singh vs Laxmi Narain Singh on 24 March, 1992 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1992-03-23T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-03-12T15:12:36+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Anita Laxmi Narayan Singh vs Laxmi Narain Singh on 24 March, 1992\",\"datePublished\":\"1992-03-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-12T15:12:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992\"},\"wordCount\":1687,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992\",\"name\":\"Anita Laxmi Narayan Singh vs Laxmi Narain Singh on 24 March, 1992 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1992-03-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-12T15:12:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Anita Laxmi Narayan Singh vs Laxmi Narain Singh on 24 March, 1992\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Anita Laxmi Narayan Singh vs Laxmi Narain Singh on 24 March, 1992 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Anita Laxmi Narayan Singh vs Laxmi Narain Singh on 24 March, 1992 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1992-03-23T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-03-12T15:12:36+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Anita Laxmi Narayan Singh vs Laxmi Narain Singh on 24 March, 1992","datePublished":"1992-03-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-12T15:12:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992"},"wordCount":1687,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992","name":"Anita Laxmi Narayan Singh vs Laxmi Narain Singh on 24 March, 1992 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1992-03-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-12T15:12:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anita-laxmi-narayan-singh-vs-laxmi-narain-singh-on-24-march-1992#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Anita Laxmi Narayan Singh vs Laxmi Narain Singh on 24 March, 1992"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/271301","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=271301"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/271301\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=271301"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=271301"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=271301"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}