CASE BRIEF

CASE NAME AND CASE LAW:

Anupam Das v Mampi Das; (CR(P) No.15(SH) of 2007);
[Section 25,13(1)(a),(e) & (d)of the Hindu Marriage
Act,1955,Section 27 of Special Marriage Act,1954,Article 227
Of The Constitution Of India]
FACTS:

The petitioner & respondent solemnized wedding firstly

according to the provisions of Special Marriage Act,1954 & then
according to Hindu Marriage Act,1955 at the Kamakhya
Temple,Guwahati. A child was also born out of the
wedlock.After 4 years of the marriage the petitioner filed for a
divorce under section 13(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act on the
grounds of cruelty & also seeked permanent alimony.She
alleged that the district Judge has erred the law & claimed that
he had no jurisdiction & that his interpretation on permanent
alimony is defected.

ISSUE:
Whether the judge had the power or not?
JUDGEMENT:
The Hon’ble District Court Of Shillong on 4th October,2007 by a
single judge bench of Justice T.Vaiphei held that the authority
has power under the law,merely because while exercising that
power the source of Power is not specifically referred to or a
reference is made to a wrong provision of law,that by itself
does not vitiate the exercise of power as long as the power
does exit & can be traced to a source available. The learned
judge proceeded under Special Marriage Act & entertained the
petition under article 227 of the Indian Constitution.