• About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of use
  • Contact Us
Tuesday, January 19, 2021
Law Trend
  • google-play
  • apple-store
  • Login
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Trending Stories
  • Court Updates
  • Judgements
  • Law Trend - हिन्दी
  • Bare Acts and Rules
    • Central
    • State
  • Webinar
  • Columns
  • Online Internship
  • More
    • Humour
    • Submit Judgment/Order/Posts
    • Quotes
    • Legal Dictionary
    • Courts Weblink
No Result
View All Result
Law Trend
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Trending Stories
  • Court Updates
  • Judgements
  • Law Trend - हिन्दी
  • Bare Acts and Rules
    • Central
    • State
  • Webinar
  • Columns
  • Online Internship
  • More
    • Humour
    • Submit Judgment/Order/Posts
    • Quotes
    • Legal Dictionary
    • Courts Weblink
No Result
View All Result
Law Trend
No Result
View All Result

Lawyers and Judges Playing Cricket Together Doesn’t Imply Bias: Supreme Court

Law Trend by Law Trend
October 1, 2020
in Judgements, Trending Stories
4 min read
293 12
0
supreme court
593
SHARES
1.7k
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare via WhatsappShare via EmailPinterest

Today in the Supreme Court, Hon’ble Mr. Justice V Ramasubramanian of the Supreme Court of India passed his judgement in a transfer petition that was filed before him.

Supreme Court Found no merit in allegations of bias raised by the respondent and allowed the transfer petition

Brief Facts of the case Neetu Yadav Versus Sachin Yadav are as follows:

The Petitioner filed a transfer petition, and she requested the Court to transfer the divorce petition filed by her husband from Family Court, Dwarka to Family Court, Indore.

The wedding between the parties was solemnised on 21.02.2008, and they have two children together as well. The age of the boy is around eight years, and the age of the girl is around 11 years.

Arguments Raised by the Parties:-

The Argument of the petitioner:-

The petitioner stated before the Court that she was dependent on her old parents, and she and her children are residing with them. She submitted that If the case is tried at the Family Court Dwarka, it will be challenging for her to travel over 800 km to attend the hearings and on this ground, the case should be transferred to the Family Court, Indore.

Arguments of the Respondents:-

The main contention raised by the respondent was that the entire family of the petitioner was  “influentially associated with the judicial structure of Madhya Pradesh”. 

It was submitted that the mother of the petitioner retired from a Senior Administrative position in the district judiciary. It was also stated that she had excellent terms and relations with all the judicial officers of the Courts and was also associated with “Unionised Cadre of District Court and their Cooperative Societies”. The respondent also pointed out that senior officials of the Court used to visit the family for celebrations and functions, which shows a clear bias.

The respondent also alleged that due to her mother’s influence, the first notice in the divorce petition was returned as unserved.

It was also mentioned that the brother of the petitioner is a renowned advocate in the M.P. High Court and wields a lot of influence. It was also stated that the younger brother of the petitioner works in the I.T. department of the M.P. High Court.

The respondent submitted that as the whole family of the petitioner works in the Judicial arena of M.P., it will be next to impossible for the respondent to get a fair trial there.

The reasoning of the Court

The Court observed the fact that the respondent had filed the case in Dwarka Court because he was recently posted to Delhi while earlier he used to stay in Indore.

Further the Hon’ble Judge observed that the contention of the respondent was based solely on the fact that the family of the petitioner works in the Judicial setup of M.P.

While considering the evidence that the respondent had submitted, photos of a cricket match between various members of the Bar of M.P. and the bench of the Court and copies of the Facebook page of the brother where members of the Court had liked or commented some posts, the Hon’ble judge opined that the allegation of bias could not be proved just because of a cricket match or socialising on Facebook.

The decision of the Court

The Court held that the allegations of bias were not proved satisfactorily and the case has been directed to be transferred from Family Court, South West, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi to Family Court, Indore, Madhya Pradesh.

Case Details

Title: Neetu Yadav vs Sachin Yadav    

Case No. Transfer Petition (Civil) No.455 OF 2020

Date of Order: 30.09.2020

Quorum: Hon’ble Justice V Ramasubramanian

Read Judgment
Tags: latest judgementrecent judgementSupreme Courtsupreme Court Judgmenttransfertrend2

Related Posts

files
Court Updates

Appoint more Judges For 3.5 Crore cases pending in Subordinate Courts: PIL in Supreme Court

January 19, 2021
Yogi Adityanath
Court Updates

Accused Calling “UP CM Thick Skinned” Granted Bail by Allahabad HC

January 19, 2021
Supreme Court New Image (4)
Trending Stories

Who is liable to pay gratuity to teachers of Govt Aided Colleges?

January 19, 2021
Supreme Court New 9
Judgements

Prescription Of Higher Educational Qualification For Promotion is not Arbitrary: Supreme Court

January 19, 2021
punjab-haryana-high-court
Trending Stories

Anticipatory Bail For Murder of Person Alive Rejected; HC Directs Session Judge to Study and Write Synopsis of SC Judgments

January 19, 2021
right to marry and religion conversion
Trending Stories

Lucknow based Women’s right group moves Allahabad High Court against New Anti Conversion law

January 19, 2021

POPULAR NEWS

  • advocate sticker fortuner

    Where is the Provision of Using Advocate Sticker on Vehicle?

    5013 shares
    Share 2005 Tweet 1253
  • What is the tenure of protection granted under Anticipatory Bail? :SC 5 Judges

    4801 shares
    Share 1920 Tweet 1200
  • Air Asia Crashes Against Gaurav Taneja; Court Says Airline Suppressed Facts

    4627 shares
    Share 1851 Tweet 1157
  • Husband-Wife Take Oath as High Court Judge

    3244 shares
    Share 1298 Tweet 811
  • Is Using Stickers of ‘‘Advocate’’ on Vehicle legally Allowed?

    3166 shares
    Share 1266 Tweet 792
Law Trend

Rabhyaa Foundation has started this platform on values enshrined in the Preamble of the Constitution of India. The object of this platform is to create informed citizens with recent legal updates, Judgments, Legislations of Parliament and State Legislatures, and views of experts in the field of law, in plain and pointed language, for the intellectual development of citizens.
Our tag line “The Line of Law” guides that this......
Read More

Follow Us On Social Media

Subscribe to our News Letter

Sign Up for weekly newsletter to get the latest news, Updates and amazing offers delivered directly in to your inbox.

Categories

  • Trending Stories
  • Court Updates
  • Columns
  • Bare Acts and Rules
  • Online Internship
  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of use
  • Contact Us

© 2020 Law Trends| All Right Reserved | Designed ByAaratechnologies Pvt Ltd

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Trending Stories
  • Court Updates
  • Judgements
  • Law Trend – हिन्दी
  • Bare Acts and Rules
    • Central
    • State
      • Uttar Pradesh Acts
      • Uttar Pradesh Rules
      • Uttrakhand
      • DELHI
  • Webinar/Videos
  • Columns
  • Online Internship
  • More
    • Humour
    • Submit Judgment/Order/Posts
    • Quotes
    • Legal Dictionary
    • Courts Weblink
  • Android App
  • IOS APP

© 2020 Law Trends| All Right Reserved | Designed ByAaratechnologies Pvt Ltd

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Create New Account!

Fill the forms bellow to register

All fields are required. Log In

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In