{"id":34414,"date":"2009-11-20T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-11-19T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009"},"modified":"2018-12-06T08:36:07","modified_gmt":"2018-12-06T03:06:07","slug":"surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009","title":{"rendered":"Surjit Kaur vs Avtar Singh & Anr on 20 November, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Surjit Kaur vs Avtar Singh & Anr on 20 November, 2009<\/div>\n
FAO No.114-M of 2003                                          1\n\n\n\n      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT\n                     CHANDIGARH\n\n\n\n\n                                FAO No.114-M of 2003\n                                Date of decision: 20.11.2009\n\n\n\n\nSurjit Kaur                                             ..Appellant\n\n                                Versus\n\n\nAvtar Singh & Anr.                                      ...Respondents\n\n\n\n\nCORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA\n\n\n\n\nPresent:-     Mr.Gurcharan Dass, Advocate,\n              for the appellant.\n\n              None for the respondents.\n\n                   ---\n\n      1.      Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may\n              be allowed to see the judgment?\n\n       2.     To be referred to the Reporters or not?\n\n       3.     Whether the judgment should be reported in\n              Digest?\n                         ---\n\nVINOD K. SHARMA,J.\n<\/pre>\n
              This is wife’s appeal against the judgment and decree dated
\n FAO No.114-M of 2003                                              2<\/span><\/p>\n
14.2.2003 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Ludhiana vide<\/p>\n
which petition filed by respondent\/husband under section 13 of the Hindu<\/p>\n
Marriage Act, 1955 (for short the Act) was accepted and the marriage<\/p>\n
between the parties was ordered to be dissolved by a decree of divorce.<\/p>\n
             The parties to the litigation were married according to Sikh<\/p>\n
rites on 21.6.1990 at Mohalla Nanakpura, Raikot, District Ludhiana. After<\/p>\n
the marriage, the parties resided together at village Jodhan, District<\/p>\n
Ludhiana. No child was born out of this wedlock. The case of the<\/p>\n
respondent\/husband was that the appellant\/wife developed relations with<\/p>\n
Sukhchain Singh son of Naranjan Singh, resident of Sabaddi khurd and at<\/p>\n
his instance created a scene in matrimonial home whenever the<\/p>\n
respondent\/husband objected to the illicit liaison. It was the case set up by<\/p>\n
the respondent\/husband that the appellant claimed that she would rather<\/p>\n
leave the respondent\/husband than severe          her relation with Sukhchain<\/p>\n
Singh. The case further set up was that all attempts of      the respondent and<\/p>\n
his relations to discontinue illicit relation failed.   The appellant thereafter<\/p>\n
left matrimonial home on 22.8.1992 without any reasonable cause. It was<\/p>\n
the case of the respondent that he along with respectables went to the house<\/p>\n
of the appellant to persuade her not to do illegal or illegitimate acts but she<\/p>\n
refused to join the society of respondent No.1 by claiming that she would<\/p>\n
live with Sukhchain Singh. Divorce was also sought on the ground of<\/p>\n
desertion besides cruelty and adultery.\n<\/p>\n
             The appellant appeared in pursuance to the notice and filed<\/p>\n
written statement contesting the petition. Relationship between the parties
\n FAO No.114-M of 2003                                            3<\/span><\/p>\n
was    admitted. It was pleaded case of the respondent that the marriage<\/p>\n
between the parties had taken place 19-20 years back and after the marriage<\/p>\n
the appellant was blessed with a male child but he died soon thereafter.<\/p>\n
Illicit relations with Sukhchain Singh were denied. The appellant also<\/p>\n
denied the averments with regard to the convening of panchayat as alleged<\/p>\n
in the petition. It was claimed that Sukhchain Singh is the husband of real<\/p>\n
sister of respondent No.1 and was supporting the respondent in getting<\/p>\n
decree of divorce. The stand taken in the written statement was that about 3<\/p>\n
years prior to the filing of the petition she was mercilessly beaten by the<\/p>\n
respondent\/husband and turned out of matrimonial home. It was claimed<\/p>\n
that the appellant and her family members tried to resolve the matter but the<\/p>\n
respondent refused to keep the appellant in the matrimonial home. It was<\/p>\n
also the case of the appellant\/wife that the respondent claimed that he<\/p>\n
wanted to marry a beautiful girl as he was a smart person. It was also<\/p>\n
claimed that she was willing to join the matrimonial home but the<\/p>\n
respondent was not willing to keep her.\n<\/p>\n
            In the replication the averments made in the petition were<\/p>\n
reasserted while denying those made in the written statement.<\/p>\n
            On the pleadings of the parties, the learned Additional District<\/p>\n
Judge framed the following issues:-\n<\/p>\n
            1.     Whether respondent No.1 has been maintaining illicit<\/p>\n
                   relations with Sukhchain Singh, respondent No.2? If so<\/p>\n
                   its effect? OPA<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
            2.     Whether respondent has treated the petitioner with
\n FAO No.114-M of 2003                                           4<\/span><\/p>\n
                   cruelty? OPA<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
            3.     Whether respondent has deserted the petitioner for a<\/p>\n
                   period of more than two years before filing of the<\/p>\n
                   petition? OPA<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
            4.     Relief.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            In support of his case the respondent\/husband examined Sadhu<\/p>\n
Singh, Member Panchayat as PW 1 who supported the case of the<\/p>\n
respondent with regard to the illicit relations of the appellant with<\/p>\n
Sukhchain Singh. He also deposed regarding convening of panchayat by the<\/p>\n
respondent\/husband as he was one of the members of the panchayat.<\/p>\n
Learned matrimonial court found that his evidence remained unshaken in<\/p>\n
the cross examination. The respondent also examined Ujjagar Singh who<\/p>\n
has also testified that the appellant was having illicit relations with one<\/p>\n
Sukhchain Singh. Needless to mention that even respondent No.1 supported<\/p>\n
his case while appearing as his own witness.\n<\/p>\n
            As against this the appellant examined her brother to deny the<\/p>\n
allegations made in the petition besides herself appearing in the witness<\/p>\n
box. Learned matrimonial court found that though specific stand was taken<\/p>\n
by the appellant in the written statement that she was given merciless<\/p>\n
beating and turned out of house but she failed to disclose any reason for<\/p>\n
such beating. The learned matrimonial court also found that the stand of the<\/p>\n
appellant that Sukhchain Singh was the husband of sister of respondent<\/p>\n
No.1 stood belied from the fact that the name of the husband of the sister of<\/p>\n
respondent No.1 was Rachhpinder Singh and not Sukhchain Singh.
\n FAO No.114-M of 2003                                             5<\/span><\/p>\n
             On appreciation of evidence, the learned matrimonial court<\/p>\n
decided issue No.1 in favour of the respondent\/husband. In view of the<\/p>\n
findings recorded on issue No.1, the learned matrimonial court found that<\/p>\n
maintaining of illicit relations by the wife with a third person is a worst type<\/p>\n
of cruelty and therefore, decided issue No.2 also in favour of the<\/p>\n
respondent\/husband and against the appellant\/wife.\n<\/p>\n
             The learned matrimonial court also found that it was admitted<\/p>\n
case that the appellant was staying at her parental house for the last 4 years<\/p>\n
and further that in spite of the best efforts made by the respondent\/husband<\/p>\n
she had refused to join his company. The learned matrimonial court found<\/p>\n
that merely because she had offered to join the matrimonial home in court,<\/p>\n
could not nullify the fact that the appellant\/wife had deserted the<\/p>\n
respondent\/husband for a period of more than 2 years immediately<\/p>\n
preceding filing of the present petition for dissolution of marriage.<\/p>\n
Therefore, the leaned matrimonial court also found that ground of desertion<\/p>\n
also stood proved.\n<\/p>\n
             Mr.Gurcharan Dass, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the<\/p>\n
appellant challenged the judgment and decree on the plea that Sukhchain<\/p>\n
Singh was real brother-in-law of the respondent\/husband and therefore, the<\/p>\n
learned Additional District Judge committed an error in recording the<\/p>\n
finding on issue No.1 against the appellant. Learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
appellant also referred to the cross-examination of PW 1 to contend that the<\/p>\n
allegations regarding illicit relations by PW 1 were based on information<\/p>\n
said to have been given by the husband and therefore, was merely hearsay
\n FAO No.114-M of 2003                                                6<\/span><\/p>\n
evidence on which no reliance could be placed. It was also the contention<\/p>\n
of the learned counsel for the appellant that in the cross-examination Sadhu<\/p>\n
Singh could not give the date and month when panchayats were said to<\/p>\n
have gone and therefore, the evidence of PW 1 did not inspire any<\/p>\n
confidence. He also referred to the statement of PW 4, to point out the<\/p>\n
contradiction.\n<\/p>\n
             Learned counsel for the appellant thereafter referred to other<\/p>\n
statements to contend that the evidence led by the respondent\/husband did<\/p>\n
not inspire confidence, whereas the evidence led by the appellant showed<\/p>\n
that allegations of adultery were totally false and baseless. It was also<\/p>\n
contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that plea of desertion has<\/p>\n
been accepted merely on the basis of presumption. It was lastly contended<\/p>\n
by the learned counsel for the appellant that the petition having been filed<\/p>\n
with inordinate delay was liable to be rejected under section 23 of the Act.<\/p>\n
             On consideration of matter, I find no force in the contentions<\/p>\n
raised by the learned counsel for the appellant.\n<\/p>\n
             It is not in dispute that the allegations levelled by the<\/p>\n
respondent were supported by an independent evidence as well as relations.<\/p>\n
The stand taken by the appellant in the written statement regarding her<\/p>\n
being turned out of matrimonial house after giving beatings was rightly not<\/p>\n
believed by the learned matrimonial court for the reason that neither the<\/p>\n
appellant nor his brother was able to give any reason for giving beatings as<\/p>\n
there was no allegations of the demand of dowry etc. The plea that the<\/p>\n
reason of discord was that the respondent wanted to marry a beautiful girl was also
\n FAO No.114-M of 2003                                            7<\/span><\/p>\n
not proved by leading any evidence. Rather the appellant in her statement<\/p>\n
also did not mention this fact. If the evidence led by the parties is read vis-<\/p>\n
a-vis the pleadings no other conclusion than the one arrived at by the<\/p>\n
learned matrimonial court can be arrived at. It is well settled law that the<\/p>\n
appellate court cannot reverse the judgment merely on the plea that other<\/p>\n
view also is possible. In the present case the findings have been recorded on<\/p>\n
appreciation of evidence of three witnesses who were respectable persons,<\/p>\n
whereas, the stand of the appellant that Sukhchain Singh was brother-in-law<\/p>\n
of respondent No.1 and was supporting his case stood belied as name of<\/p>\n
brother-in-law of respondent is Rachhpinder Singh. The contentions of the<\/p>\n
learned counsel for the appellant, therefore, cannot be accepted<\/p>\n
             Consequently, findings of the learned matrimonial court are<\/p>\n
affirmed on all the issues and appeal is ordered to be dismissed but with no<\/p>\n
order as to costs.<\/p>\n
\n\n                                                   (Vinod K.Sharma)\n20.11.2009                                               Judge\nrp\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Surjit Kaur vs Avtar Singh & Anr on 20 November, 2009 FAO No.114-M of 2003 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.114-M of 2003 Date of decision: 20.11.2009 Surjit Kaur ..Appellant Versus Avtar Singh & Anr. …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA Present:- Mr.Gurcharan […]<\/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":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-34414","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSurjit Kaur vs Avtar Singh & Anr on 20 November, 2009 - 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\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Surjit Kaur vs Avtar Singh & Anr on 20 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-11-19T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-12-06T03:06:07+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Surjit Kaur vs Avtar Singh & Anr on 20 November, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-06T03:06:07+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1516,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009\",\"name\":\"Surjit Kaur vs Avtar Singh & Anr on 20 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-06T03:06:07+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Surjit Kaur vs Avtar Singh & Anr on 20 November, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Surjit Kaur vs Avtar Singh & Anr on 20 November, 2009 - 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\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Surjit Kaur vs Avtar Singh & Anr on 20 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-11-19T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-12-06T03:06:07+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Surjit Kaur vs Avtar Singh & Anr on 20 November, 2009","datePublished":"2009-11-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-06T03:06:07+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009"},"wordCount":1516,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009","name":"Surjit Kaur vs Avtar Singh & Anr on 20 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-11-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-06T03:06:07+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/surjit-kaur-vs-avtar-singh-anr-on-20-november-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Surjit Kaur vs Avtar Singh & Anr on 20 November, 2009"}]},{"@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\/34414","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=34414"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/34414\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=34414"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=34414"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=34414"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}