Unit VII · Topic 3Matrimonial remedies - Divorce and theories of divorce – Previous Year Questions

Ans. (*) : Both (b) and (c) are correct

Explanation: In Sushil Kumar v. Usha (1987), the Delhi High Court, and in Satya v. Shriram (1983), the Punjab and Haryana High Court held that abortion by wife without husband's consent, when the husband wanted the child, amounts to cruelty. Cruelty is a ground for divorce and after the Hindu Marriage Amendment Act 1976, it is also a ground for judicial separation. Therefore both options (b) and (c) are correct.

Ans. (d) : Incompatible Temperamental adjustment

Explanation: Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 describes the grounds for divorce, which mentions cruelty 13(1-a), desertion 13(1-b), and adultery 13(1). Incompatible temperamental adjustment is not a ground for divorce.

Ans. (c) : The Husband has been sentenced to imprisonment for a period of two years or upwards

Explanation: Section 2 of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act 1939 provides 9 grounds to a Muslim woman on the basis of which she can dissolve the marriage (divorce). Section 2(3) states that if the husband has been sentenced to imprisonment of seven years or more, a decree of dissolution of marriage can be obtained on this ground. If the imprisonment is of two years or more, it is not a ground — hence option (c) is not a ground.

Ans. (b) : Section 9

Explanation: Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 provides for restitution of conjugal rights. In Saroj Rani v. Sudarshan Kumar (1984), Section 9 (Restitution of Conjugal Rights) was not considered violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.

Ans. (b) : (A) is correct, but (R) is incorrect

Explanation: Section 13(1-A) of the Hindu Marriage Act is based on the breakdown theory of marriage, according to which divorce can take place under the following circumstances: (1) If cohabitation has not resumed for 1 year after the decree of judicial separation. (2) If restitution of conjugal rights has not been implemented for 1 year or more after the decree of restitution of conjugal rights. It is not correct to say that 'breakdown of marriage' is an easy way of dissolution of marriage. The court dissolves marriage only when it becomes impossible to re-establish the matrimonial relationship for both parties. When the possibility of the parties living together comes to an end, it is just that such marriage should be dissolved.

Ans. (b) : Two years

Explanation: For desertion to mature as a ground for divorce, under Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, desertion must be continuous for at least two years. The essential meaning of desertion is that one party to the marriage permanently abandons the other without any reason or without their consent, and this must continue for two years.

Ans. (b) : One guilty party and other party to be innocent

Explanation: The fault/guilt theory of divorce can be applied only when one party is guilty and the other party is innocent. Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act provides grounds for divorce based on this theory. According to this theory, any marriage, if one party proves that the other party has committed any matrimonial offence, can be dissolved.

Ans. (d) : both (A) and (B)

Explanation: Under Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, desertion has been stated as a ground for divorce. It has now been judicially settled that desertion includes both actual desertion and constructive desertion.

Consider the following propositions and give the correct answer:

A void marriage remains valid until a decree annulling it has been passed by a competent court

A void marriage is never a valid marriage and there is no necessity of any decree annulling it

Ans. (a) : Both (A) and (R) are correct

Explanation: The grounds for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act are given in Section 13. (A) Grounds available to both husband and wife equally (Section 13(1)) — (a) adultery (b) cruelty (c) desertion (d) religious conversion (e) mental illness (f) sexual perversion (g) renunciation of the world (h) civil death. (B) Grounds available only to the wife (Section 13(2)) — (a) Bigamy (b) rape, sodomy or bestiality committed by husband (c) decree for maintenance (d) option of puberty. Break down of marriage can be a ground for divorce only when it falls under one of the 2 grounds given in Section 13(1A). The provision for divorce by mutual consent is given under Section 13-B.

Ans. (c) : Cruelty

Explanation: Dastane v. Dastane case is related to cruelty. Cruelty includes both physical and mental cruelty. In this case, the wife was found guilty of cruelty towards the husband and consequently a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty was passed.

Ans. (d) : Dissolution on rescission of the contract of marriage by judicial decree at the instance of the wife

Explanation: Dissolution of marriage by court order is called judicial divorce. In Muslim law, judicial dissolution of marriage is called Faskh. The Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act 1939 provides one ground that any wife, whose marriage has been solemnized under Muslim law, can obtain judicial dissolution of marriage.

Ans. (b) : T. Sareetha v. T. Venkatasubah

Explanation: In T. Saritha v. Venkatasubbaiah, AIR 1983 Andhra Pradesh 356, the court held that Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act is constitutionally violative of the right to human dignity and privacy and therefore void. However in Saroj Rani v. Sudarshan Kumar, AIR 1984 SC, the Supreme Court reversed the law propounded in T. Saritha case and held that Section 9 does not violate Article 21.

Ans. (c) : Section 13(IA) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Explanation: (1) Section 13(1) of Hindu Marriage Act 1955 — grounds for divorce available to both parties (2) Section 13(2) — four grounds available only to wife (3) Section 13(1-A) — Breakdown theory of divorce (4) Section 13(B) — Divorce by mutual consent

Ans. (d) : 4, 3, 1, 2

Explanation: In the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, the grounds of divorce are mentioned in Sections 13, 13A and 13B. (1) Customary grounds — these grounds have already been recognised as grounds for divorce in Hindu family law. (2) Fault (Fault) — the right to get the other party's marriage dissolved on the basis of fault or deficiency of any of the parties. Examples are the grounds given in Section 13 sub-clauses (1) and (2). (3) Mutual consent — it is given in Section 13B that parties can get the marriage dissolved by mutual consent. (4) Breakdown (Break down) — on the basis that if cohabitation has not resumed within one year after the decree of judicial separation between parties, a petition for dissolution of marriage can be presented under Section 13(1-A).

Ans. (a) : one year

Explanation: According to Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, both parties can together present a petition for dissolution of marriage by mutual consent before the district court, if — (1) The parties have been living separately for one year or more. (2) They have not been able to live together. (3) They have mutually agreed that the marriage should be dissolved.

Here are all the extracted questions, answers and explanations in English:

Ans. (b) : Two years

Explanation: Under Section 13(1)(i-A) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, this statutory provision is that desertion (abandonment) should be continuous for at least two years for it to be a ground for marital relief (divorce), as the period of desertion must be at least two years.

Ans. (b) : 71st Report

Explanation: Irretrievable breakdown of marriage (Break Down Principle of Marriage Divorce) is the most modern principle of divorce and many countries have given it recognition in their laws. The Law Commission of India recommended in the 71st Report to incorporate this principle. In 1964, the irretrievable breakdown of marriage divorce principle was established in Hindu law through the Hindu Marriage (Amendment) Act 1964.

Ans. (d) : Adultery by a Hindu husband is a ground for judicial separation under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and a ground for divorce under Section 13(1). This right is available to both husband and wife.

Explanation: Under the Hindu Marriage Act, adultery is recognized as both a ground for judicial separation and divorce for either spouse.

Ans. (a) : Both (A) and (R) are true

Explanation: A marriage solemnized under the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 is dissoluble in certain circumstances if it fulfills the conditions given in Section 13. Hindu marriage is considered a sacred bond.

Ans. (d) : All the above

Explanation: Under Section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, a matrimonial suit shall be filed before the district court within whose original civil jurisdiction: (i) The marriage was solemnized, or (ii) Where the respondent resides at the time of filing the petition, or (iii) Where the parties to the marriage last resided together, or (iv) If the wife is the petitioner, where she resides on the date of presenting the petition.

Ans. (a) : Saroja Rani v. Sudarshan Kumar

Explanation: In Saroja Rani v. Sudarshan Kumar A.I.R. 1984 SC, the case was related to the restitution of conjugal rights. In this case it was determined that Section 9 does not violate Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.

Ans. (c) : Divorce and Judicial Separation both

Explanation: A single act of adultery is a ground for both divorce and judicial separation. Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 deals with judicial separation and Section 13 deals with divorce.

Dower in Muslim Law is

Dowry

An obligation imposed upon husband as a mark of respect for wife

Sale price of women

Ans. (a) : (A) and (R) are true, (R) is correct explanation of (A)

Explanation: Section 2 of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act 1939 gives grounds (I) to (IX) for decree of dissolution of marriage which are based on Maliki school. This Act is based on the opinion of Muslim scholars (Ijma).

Ans. (d) : A-2, B-3, C-4, D-1

Explanation:

Judicial separation — Section 10 (Hindu Marriage Act 1955)

Divorce — Section 13

Voidable Marriage — Section 10 (correct: Section 12)

Restitution of Conjugal Rights — Section 9

Ans. (b) : A-3, B-4, C-2, D-1

Explanation:

Impotency of husband — Nullity of marriage

Marriage between Sapinda relationship — Void marriage

Pre-marriage pregnancy — Voidable marriage

Option of puberty (Khyar-ul-Bulugh) — Divorce (Talaq)

Here are all the extracted questions, answers and explanations in English:

Ans. (b) : 2 years

Explanation: Under Section 2(vi) of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act 1939, a Muslim wife can sue for divorce if her husband has been insane for a period of 2 years.

Ans. (c) : The wife has not received any maintenance

Explanation: Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act deals with divorce by mutual consent. According to Section 13-B —

The parties must have been living separately for one year or more.

They have not been able to live together and have mutually agreed.

They can present a petition for dissolution of marriage before the district court. Within 6 months of presenting the petition and within 18 months, upon the request of both parties and after hearing both parties, if the court is satisfied that the marriage has taken place or not, the court can pass a decree declaring that the marriage has been dissolved from the date of the decree.

Ans. (a) : One year or upwards

Explanation: According to Section 13(1)(A) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, any party to the marriage, whether before or after this Act, can file a petition for dissolution of marriage by divorce on this ground — if cohabitation between the parties to the marriage has not resumed for one year or more after the passing of the decree of judicial separation.

Ans. (d) : II, III and IV

Explanation: Judicial separation is defined in Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, according to which any party to the marriage may file a petition in the district court on any ground under Section 13 sub-clause (1) and in the case of wife under Section 13(2) on any of the specified grounds on which divorce can be sought, for a decree of judicial separation. The result of a decree of judicial separation —

The matrimonial bond is not dissolved, only matrimonial rights and obligations are suspended.

The parties are not bound to cohabit together.

The same Section 13(1A) provides that if cohabitation does not resume between the parties for one year, a decree of divorce can be obtained.

Ans. (b) : Saroj Rani v. Sudarshan Explanation: In Saroj Rani v. Sudarshan Kumar (1984), the Supreme Court upheld Section 9 (Restitution of Conjugal Rights) of the Hindu Marriage Act as constitutionally valid and intra-vires Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. The court held that the right to live together is inherent in the institution of marriage. In contrast, the Andhra Pradesh High Court in T. Sareetha v. T.V. Subbhiah had struck down Section 9 as unconstitutional, but that view was overruled.

Ans. (a) : A-2, B-1, C-4, D-3 Explanation: Under Section 2 of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939, the grounds are mapped as follows — Section 2(iii) deals with imprisonment of husband for seven or more years; Section 2(vii) deals with option of puberty (allowing a wife married before puberty to repudiate the marriage); Section 2(i) deals with husband missing (whereabouts unknown) for four years; and Section 2(v) deals with impotency of the husband. Hence A-2, B-1, C-4, D-3 is the correct matching.

Ans. (b) : Will Theory Explanation: The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 recognizes three theories of divorce: the Fault Theory under Section 13(1) (where one party must prove a matrimonial offence by the other), the Mutual Consent Theory under Section 13B (added by the Marriage Laws Amendment Act, 1976), and partially the Breakdown Theory under Section 13(1A) (where breakdown of marriage is presumed after judicial separation or restitution decree). The Will Theory — where either spouse can unilaterally dissolve the marriage simply by expressing their will without any fault or consent — has never been recognized or enacted under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

Ans. (d) : 1, 3, and 4 Explanation: Under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, fault grounds of divorce include adultery (extra marital sex) under Section 13(1)(i), desertion under Section 13(1)(ib), and conversion to non-Hindu religion under Section 13(1)(ii). Consent obtained by force or fraud is a ground to annul a voidable marriage under Section 12, not a ground for divorce.

Ans. (b) : 1, 2, 3 and 4 Explanation: Under Section 2 of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939, all four are valid grounds: husband's imprisonment for 7 years (Section 2(iii)), failure to maintain for 2 years (Section 2(ii)), husband missing for 4 years (Section 2(i)), and failure to perform marital obligations for 3 years (Section 2(iv)).

Ans. (a) : Fault theory only Explanation: Originally, the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 recognized only the fault theory of divorce under Section 13. Divorce by mutual consent (consent theory) was added later by the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976 through Section 13B. Breakdown theory has not yet been fully adopted under the Act.

Propositions are:

A void marriage remains valid until a decree annulling it has been passed by a competent court.

A void marriage is never a valid marriage and there is no necessity of any decree annulling it.

A voidable marriage is a valid subsisting marriage until a decree annulling it has been passed by a court of competent jurisdiction.

Which of the above propositions is correct? (a) I and III are correct, but II is incorrect (b) II and III are correct, but I is incorrect (c) I and III are incorrect, but II is correct (d) I and II are incorrect, but III is correct

Ans. (b) : II and III are correct, but I is incorrect Explanation: Under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 11 declares void marriages as null and void ab initio — they require no court decree to annul them (Proposition II is correct). Section 12 deals with voidable marriages which remain valid until a decree of nullity is passed by a competent court (Proposition III is correct). Proposition I is incorrect as a void marriage does not need a decree to be declared invalid.

As per Section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 the essential conditions of a Hindu marriage are:

Monogamy

Mental capacity

Ans. (b) : Saroj Rani v. Sudarshan Explanation: In Saroj Rani v. Sudarshan Kumar (1984), the Supreme Court upheld Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act as constitutionally valid, holding that the right of spouses to live together is inherent in the concept of marriage and does not violate Articles 14 or 21 of the Constitution.

Ans. (a) : A-2, B-1, C-4, D-3 Explanation: Under Section 2 of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939: imprisonment of husband falls under Section 2(iii), option of puberty under Section 2(vii), husband missing under Section 2(i), and impotency of husband under Section 2(v).

Ans. (b) : Will Theory Explanation: The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 recognizes the Fault Theory (Section 13), Mutual Consent Theory (Section 13B added in 1976), and partially the Breakdown Theory (Section 13(1A)). The Will Theory — where either party can unilaterally dissolve the marriage at will — has never been statutorily recognized under the Act.

The offence of bigamy is not committed under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 if a person marries during lifetime of his or her spouse provided:

The first marriage is null and void

The first marriage was performed without ceremonies

The first marriage is voidable and decree annulling it has not been passed

Ans. (b) : Cannot petition for divorce within one year of marriage except in exceptional cases

Explanation: Section 14 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 embodies the "fair trial" rule which bars any petition for divorce within one year of marriage. However, the court may allow such a petition in exceptional cases of exceptional hardship to the petitioner or exceptional depravity on the part of the respondent.

With the help of codes given below mark the incorrect statement in the light of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956:

Permission of the court is not necessary except when guardian gives the child in adoption

Ans. (c) : A-3, B-1, C-2, D-4 Explanation: Section 9 deals with Restitution of Conjugal Rights. Section 5 prescribes conditions including marriageable age. Section 29(2) saves customary divorce. Section 7 prescribes ceremonies of marriage.

In which of the following cases, a child could be a Hindu?

Only one parent is a Hindu and the child was brought up as a Hindu.

Only one parent is a Hindu and the child was not brought up as a Hindu.

Ans. (c) : (2), (3) and (4) Explanation: Under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, a decree of judicial separation does not dissolve the marriage (so Statement 1 is wrong). The parties continue to be husband and wife but are not obligated to live together and neither is free to remarry (Statements 2 and 3 are correct). Section 13(1A) further provides that if cohabitation is not resumed for one year after the decree, either party may seek divorce (Statement 4 is correct).

Ans. (d) : Desertion for one year Explanation: Under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, grounds for judicial separation include renunciation of the world, seven years' absence, and conversion to non-Hindu religion among others. Desertion as a ground for judicial separation requires desertion for at least two years (not one year), so "desertion for one year" is not a recognized ground.

Ans. (b) : 3, 4, 1 and 2 (All four) Explanation: Section 13(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act provides additional grounds available exclusively to the wife: pre-Act bigamy by husband (Section 13(2)(i)), husband guilty of rape, sodomy or bestiality (Section 13(2)(ii)), non-payment of maintenance order for one year or more with no cohabitation (Section 13(2)(iii)), and repudiation (option of puberty) of marriage by the wife before 18 years of age (Section 13(2)(iv)).

Ans. (d) : Six months Explanation: Under Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, after presenting the petition for divorce by mutual consent, the parties must wait for a minimum period of six months (cooling off period) before the court can hear the petition and pass the decree, subject to a maximum of eighteen months from the date of presentation.

Ans. (b) : A-2, B-1, C-4, D-3 Explanation: Under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939: Section 3 deals with notice to heirs when husband's whereabouts are not known. Section 4 deals with effects of conversion of wife to another faith. Section 5 provides that dower rights shall not be affected. Section 2(v) lists impotency of husband as a ground for dissolution.

Ans. (c) : Only 1, 2 and 3 are correct Explanation: Under the fault/guilty theory of divorce under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act: Statement 1 is correct — if cruelty is provoked by the petitioner, divorce will be refused as the petitioner cannot take advantage of their own wrong. Statement 2 is correct — condonation by the innocent party of the guilty party's acts bars divorce. Statement 3 is correct — if both parties are guilty (doctrine of recrimination), neither can get divorce. Statement 4 is incorrect — unreasonable delay in filing the petition is indeed a bar as it implies condonation of the guilty party's acts by the innocent party.

Ans. (a) : Jewish Law Explanation: The remedy of Restitution of Conjugal Rights has its historical roots in Jewish law. It was later adopted into English ecclesiastical law and then introduced into Indian law through British influence. Under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, it is provided under Section 9, which allows either spouse to seek a court decree compelling the other to return to matrimonial home when they have withdrawn from the society of the other without reasonable cause.

Here are all the questions with answers and explanations:

Read the following propositions and give correct answer with the help of codes given below:

Propositions are:

A voidable Hindu marriage is regarded as a valid marriage until a decree annulling it has been passed by a competent court.

A void Hindu marriage is never a valid marriage and there is no necessity of any decree annulling it.

Ans. (c) : Epilepsy Explanation: Under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the grounds of divorce include leprosy (incurable, Section 13(1)(iv)), insanity/unsoundness of mind (Section 13(1)(iii)), and venereal disease (Section 13(1)(v)). Epilepsy was originally a ground for divorce but was removed by the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976. Therefore, Epilepsy is no longer a ground of divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

Ans. (a) : 1, 3 & 4 are correct, but 2 is incorrect Explanation: Under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, a decree of judicial separation does not dissolve the marriage — Statement 2 is incorrect. It merely suspends marital rights and obligations during its subsistence — Statement 1 is correct. Under Section 13(1A), if cohabitation is not resumed for one year after the decree, either party can seek divorce — Statement 3 is correct. Since the marriage bond is not dissolved, neither party can remarry — Statement 4 is correct.

Ans. (d) : 1 and 2 are both correct

Explanation: Both propositions are correct because the consent theory of divorce operates differently depending on circumstances. Under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, when both parties mutually agree to divorce, the process becomes straightforward and easy (Proposition 1 correct). However, if one party refuses to give consent or withdraws consent during the cooling-off period, divorce becomes very difficult as the court cannot grant it without mutual agreement, making the process extremely difficult (Proposition 2 correct). Hence both propositions are simultaneously true.

Here are all the questions with answers and explanations:

Ans. (a) : 1, 2 and 4 are correct, but 3 is incorrect Explanation: Under Section 2 of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939: seven years or more imprisonment of husband is a ground under Section 2(iii) — Statement 1 correct. Continued impotence of husband is a ground under Section 2(v) — Statement 2 correct. Four years absence of husband is a ground under Section 2(i) — Statement 4 correct. Statement 3 is incorrect because the ground is not insanity for one year but rather insanity, leprosy or virulent venereal disease under Section 2(vi) — there is no specific one year requirement for insanity as a standalone ground.

Ans. (d) : Pre-marriage pregnancy of wife Explanation: Under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, grounds of divorce available to both parties include desertion, cruelty, conversion, unsoundness of mind, leprosy, venereal disease, renunciation of the world, and presumption of death. Non-resumption of cohabitation after judicial separation is a ground under Section 13(1A). Pre-Act bigamy by husband is a ground available exclusively to the wife under Section 13(2). Pre-marriage pregnancy of wife is a ground to annul a voidable marriage under Section 12 — it is not a ground for divorce/dissolution of marriage.

Ans. (c) : Fault, Breakdown of Marriage, Mutual Consent and Customary Explanation: The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 currently recognizes the following theories of divorce: Fault Theory under Section 13(1) and 13(2) (matrimonial offences like cruelty, desertion, adultery etc.); Breakdown Theory under Section 13(1-A) (non-resumption of cohabitation after judicial separation or restitution decree); Mutual Consent Theory under Section 13-B (added in 1976); and Customary divorce under Section 29(2) (where custom permits divorce). Irretrievable breakdown as a standalone ground has not yet been fully codified.

Ans. (c) : A-3, B-1, C-4, D-2 Explanation: Saroj Rani v. Sudarshan Kumar (1984) — upheld the constitutionality of Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act (Restitution of Conjugal Rights). Jarden Diengadeh v. S.S. Chopra (1985) — Supreme Court strongly recommended enactment of a Uniform Civil Code under Article 44. Russel v. Russel (1897) — English case that defined and laid the foundation for the meaning of cruelty in matrimonial law. Shastri v. Muldas (1961) — Supreme Court defined the meaning and scope of "Hindu" and Hindu religious institutions.

Ans. (c) : Cruelty by the husband Explanation: Section 13(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act provides exclusive grounds of divorce for the wife only: pre-Act bigamy by husband (Section 13(2)(i)), husband guilty of rape, sodomy or bestiality (Section 13(2)(ii)), non-payment of maintenance with no cohabitation for one year (Section 13(2)(iii)), and repudiation of marriage before age 18 (Section 13(2)(iv)). Cruelty by the husband is a ground for divorce available to both husband and wife under Section 13(1)(i-a) — it is not an exclusive ground for the wife under Section 13(2).

Read the following statements and give correct answer with the help of codes given below:

A Muslim woman can marry a Kitabi.

A Shia male can contract 'Muta' with a fire worshipper.

Marriage of Muslim woman with a Hindu would be irregular.

Ans. (c) : Whereabouts of the husband have not been known for a period of 3 years Explanation: Under Section 2 of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939, the ground of husband's missing whereabouts requires that his whereabouts have not been known for a period of four years — not three years. The Act specifies four years under Section 2(i). All other options are valid grounds: seven years imprisonment under Section 2(iii), failure to maintain for two years under Section 2(ii), and failure to perform marital obligations for three years under Section 2(iv). Hence option (c) states an incorrect period and is not a valid ground.

Ans. (d) : 3 and 4 only Explanation: Under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, grounds of judicial separation are the same as grounds for divorce under Section 13 with certain exceptions. Extra marital sex (adultery) by wife is a ground available to the husband for judicial separation (Statement 1 available). Conversion of wife to non-Hindu religion is a ground (Statement 2 available). Wife's pre-marriage pregnancy is a ground only for annulment of a voidable marriage under Section 12 — it is not a ground for judicial separation (Statement 3 not available). Non-consummation due to impotence of wife is a ground for voidable marriage under Section 12, not for judicial separation (Statement 4 not available). Hence Statements 3 and 4 are not grounds for judicial separation.

Here are all the questions with answers and explanations:

Ans. (d) : Maliki School Explanation: The Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 was enacted primarily to give statutory recognition to various grounds of divorce for Muslim women. The grounds provided in Section 2 of the Act are based on the principles of the Maliki school of Muslim law, which is the most liberal school regarding the rights of Muslim women to seek divorce. The Maliki school recognizes the widest range of grounds for dissolution of marriage at the instance of the wife compared to the Hanafi, Shafai, and Shia schools.

Ans. (a) : 1, 3 and 4 Explanation: Under Section 2 of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939: whereabouts of husband not known for four years is a ground under Section 2(i) — Statement 1 correct. Cruelty by husband is a ground under Section 2(viii) — Statement 3 correct. Failure to pay maintenance for two years is a ground under Section 2(ii) — Statement 4 correct. Statement 2 is incorrect because the ground is seven years imprisonment (not four years) under Section 2(iii). Hence Statements 1, 3 and 4 are correct.

Ans. (a) : A-4, B-1, C-2, D-3 Explanation: Under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: Section 14 bars any petition for divorce within one year of marriage (fair trial rule). Section 13-A provides for alternative relief in divorce proceedings — the court may grant judicial separation instead of divorce. Section 9 deals with Restitution of Conjugal Rights. Section 10 deals with Judicial Separation. Hence the correct matching is A-4, B-1, C-2, D-3.

Here are all the questions with answers and explanations:

Ans. (b) : A-2, B-4, C-1, D-3 Explanation: Section 5(i) prescribes the condition of monogamy — neither party should have a living spouse at the time of marriage. Section 11 deals with void marriages. Section 7 prescribes the ceremonies required for a valid Hindu marriage including Saptapadi. Section 5(iii) prescribes the marriageable age — 21 for the bridegroom and 18 for the bride.

Ans. (d) : decree of judicial separation Explanation: Chandra v. Suresh (AIR 1971 Delhi 208) deals with the decree of judicial separation. Judicial separation is provided under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The application for judicial separation is made to the District Court. This case is related to the procedural and substantive aspects of judicial separation under Hindu matrimonial law.

Ans. (b) : A-3, B-1, C-4, D-2 Explanation: Section 5(i) of the Hindu Marriage Act prescribes monogamy as an essential condition — neither party should have a living spouse. Section 7 prescribes ceremonies required for a valid Hindu marriage. Section 8 deals with registration of Hindu marriages. Section 5(iii) prescribes the age of marriage — 21 for bridegroom and 18 for bride.

Ans. (c) : 1, 2 and 4 only Explanation: Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act deals with divorce on various fault grounds. Section 13(1-A) provides breakdown grounds — if parties have not resumed cohabitation for one year after a decree of judicial separation (Section 9) or restitution (Section 10). Section 13-B provides for divorce by mutual consent. Section 17 deals with punishment for bigamy — it is not a matrimonial remedy of divorce but a penal provision. Hence Sections 13, 13(1-A) and 13-B are the correct provisions dealing with divorce remedy.

Ans. (d) : (A), (B) and (D) only Explanation: Under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the fault grounds of divorce include: Desertion under Section 13(1)(ib), Cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia), and Conversion to non-Hindu religion under Section 13(1)(ii). Consent obtained by force or fraud (C) is not a ground for divorce — it is a ground to annul a voidable marriage under Section 12(1)(c). Hence A, B and D are correct fault grounds for divorce.

Given below are two statements:

Statement I: No person except the father or mother of a child shall have the capacity to give the child in adoption under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act 1956.

Ans. (c) : (3), (4), (1), (2) Explanation: The correct chronological order of these landmark cruelty cases is: Dastane v. Dastane (1975 SC) — first major Supreme Court judgment defining cruelty in matrimonial law; Bhagat v. Bhagat (1993 SC) — expanded the concept to include mental cruelty; A. Jaya Chandra v. Aneel Kaur (2004 SC) — further refined the standard of proof for cruelty; Naveen Kohli v. Neelu Kohli (2006 SC) — recommended introduction of irretrievable breakdown of marriage as ground for divorce.

Ans. (c) : Fault Theory Explanation: Originally when the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 was enacted, divorce was based solely on the Fault Theory (also called the guilt theory) under Section 13(1). Under this theory, one party must prove a matrimonial offence committed by the other party. The Consent Theory (mutual consent divorce) was added later by the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976 through Section 13B. The Breakdown Theory was partially introduced through Section 13(1A). The Will Theory has never been recognized under the Act.

Here are the extracted questions in English:

Ans. (c) : Under Section 13(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, the following grounds of divorce are available to the wife: (1) Pre-Act bigamous marriage of the husband (2) Husband guilty of rape, sodomy or bestiality after marriage (3) Non-resumption of cohabitation between parties even one year after passing of decree under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act 1956 or Section 125 CrPC 1973 (4) Repudiation of marriage. Cruelty by husband is a ground for divorce under Section 13(1) of the Act.

Ans. (c) : Under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, desertion is a ground for divorce, and the following statements are true in this regard: (1) Factum of separation (2) Animus deserendi (intention to desert) (3) The prescribed period of 2 years must have elapsed before presentation of the petition (4) Desertion must be without the consent of the petitioner

Ans. (a) : The chronological order of case laws relating to cruelty under the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 is as follows: (a) Bhagwat v. Bhagwat (b) Parveen Mehta v. Inderjeet Mehta (c) Durga Prasad Tripathi v. Arundhati Tripathi (d) Swapan Kumar Das v. Maya Rani Dutta (e) Satendra Kumar Gupta v. Kanchan Gupta & Ors

Here are the extracted questions in English:

Ans. (b) : In the case of T. Sareetha V/s T.V. Subbaiah, Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 was declared unconstitutional. However, in Saroj Rani V/s Sudarshan Kumar (1984), the court later held that the right of husband and wife to live together in India is not a creation of law but is inherent in the very concept of marriage. It cannot be said that Section 9 of the Act violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.

Ans. (b) : The correct matching of List I with List II is as follows: A. Restitution of Conjugal rights — Section 9, Hindu Marriage Act 1955 B. Judicial separation — Section 10, Hindu Marriage Act 1955 C. No petition for divorce within 1 year of marriage — Section 14, Hindu Marriage Act 1955 D. Voidable marriage — Section 12, Hindu Marriage Act 1955

Ans. (b) : Under the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, cruelty is mentioned as a ground for both judicial separation and divorce. Cruelty can be physical or mental, but it is extremely difficult to give a universal definition of cruelty applicable to all circumstances.

Answer: (a) Respondent is convicted for committing an offence

Answer: (b) (A), (C), (B), (E), (D)

Answer: (a) (A), (B), (C), (D) Only

Answer: (d) When the divorce decree was stayed

Explanation: A party can remarry if divorce decree is stayed

Answer: (c) 71st Report

Explanation: The 71st Law Commission Report of India recommended inclusion of irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a valid ground for divorce.

Answer: (d) E, B, A, C, D