<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1969 (9) TMI 122 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199488</link>
    <description>A husband seeking divorce on the ground of non-compliance with a decree for restitution of conjugal rights had to show continued bona fide efforts to take the wife back and proper arrangements for her return. The wife&#039;s letters expressing willingness to return, supported by certificates of posting, attracted the presumption of posting and receipt under the Evidence Act, and that presumption was not rebutted. The husband admitted that he made no enquiry, sent no letter, and took no step after the decree, while the surrounding conduct and reconciliation efforts by the wife&#039;s relatives negatived deliberate default by the wife. The court therefore held that the wife had not failed to comply with the restitution decree and divorce was not available to the husband.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 1969 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Mar 2018 10:27:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=511181" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1969 (9) TMI 122 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199488</link>
      <description>A husband seeking divorce on the ground of non-compliance with a decree for restitution of conjugal rights had to show continued bona fide efforts to take the wife back and proper arrangements for her return. The wife&#039;s letters expressing willingness to return, supported by certificates of posting, attracted the presumption of posting and receipt under the Evidence Act, and that presumption was not rebutted. The husband admitted that he made no enquiry, sent no letter, and took no step after the decree, while the surrounding conduct and reconciliation efforts by the wife&#039;s relatives negatived deliberate default by the wife. The court therefore held that the wife had not failed to comply with the restitution decree and divorce was not available to the husband.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 1969 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199488</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>