Site navigation

Match List-I with List-II List-I - Legal Concept, etc.List-II - Related case laws, etc. (A). Mother as…

Githa Hariharan v. Reserve Bank of India ((1999)) read Section 6(a) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act so that the mother is also a natural guardian (A-IV); Sarla…

Choose your answer

Match List-I with List-II

List-I - Legal Concept, etc.List-II - Related case laws, etc.
(A). Mother as natural guardian(I). T. Sareetha v. T. Venkata Subbaiah, (1983)
(B). Conversion and Marriage(II). State of Bombay v. Narasu Appa Mali, (1952)
(C). Bigamy(III). Smt. Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995)
(D). Restitution of Conjugal Rights(IV). Githa Hariharan v. Reserve Bank of India, (1999)
Select one answer
Answer and explanation

Correct answer A

Githa Hariharan v. Reserve Bank of India ((1999)) read Section 6(a) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act so that the mother is also a natural guardian (A-IV); Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995) held that a Hindu husband's conversion to Islam to contract a second marriage does not dissolve the first marriage and attracts Section 494 IPC (B-III); State of Bombay v. Narasu Appa Mali ((1952)) upheld the Bombay law prohibiting Hindu bigamous marriages (C-II); and T. Sareetha v. T. Venkata Subbaiah ((1983)) struck down restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act as unconstitutional (D-I). The matching is "(A) - (IV), (B) - (III), (C) - (II), (D) - (I)".

Practice for these exams

Related question papers

Related exam syllabi

Related questions in this topic