3*4 MOOT COURT
April 2019
MOOT PROPOSITION 1.1
Facts:
Smt. Vishaka was married to Mr. Hamid in the year 2004. Post
marriage she converts her religion and starts practicing Islam.
She had two brothers namely Ram and Krishna. Their father Mr.
Vishnu was granted an occupancy certificate by the Land
Tribunal constituted under the provisions of the Karnataka Land
Reforms Act 1961 and the Karnataka Land Reforms Rules, 1974
In the year 2018 when Vishaka demanded for her share in the
property after demise of her father, her brothers denied her share
specifically stating that as she is converted to Islam, she is not
entitled to any share as per the provisions of the Hindu
Succession Act, 1956.
Secondly, a ground was taken in the pleadings that definition of
family as provided under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act 1961
doesn’t include married daughters. Thus she does not have any
share in the property. They have approached the advocate to
contest the dispute filed before the City Civil Court, Bangalore.
Prepare written submission on behalf of both parties.
\ AwMOOT PROPOSITION 1.2
Facts:
Smt. Vishaka was married to Mr. Hamid in the year 2004. Post
marriage she converts her religion and starts practicing Islam.
Smt. Vishaka & Hamid were blessed with a male child in 2015.
There were differences between the couple and Mr. Hamid made
a single pronouncement of Talaq and abstained from any
conjugal rights with Vishaka for a period of 3 months and at the
end of third month he claimed their marriage has been dissolved.
Vishaka filed a petition before the family court in Bangalore
seeking a declaration that the said Divorce is void inter alia
contending that even though they both practiced Islam post
marriage, their marriage was solemnised as per the Hindu
Rites, Rituals, Customs & Traditions.
Prepare written submission on behalf of both parties.
yan"MOOT PROPOSITION 1.3
Facts:
Smt. Vishaka was married to Mr. Hamid in the year 2004. Post
marriage she converts her religion and starts practicing Islam.
Smt. Vishaka & Hamid were blessed with a male child in 2015.
There were differences between the couple and Mr. Hamid made
a single pronouncement of Talaq and abstained from any
conjugal rights with Vishaka for a period of 3 months and at the
end of third month he claimed their marriage has been dissolved.
Mr. Hamid filed proceedings under The Guardians and Wards
Act, 1890 before the family court at Bangalore seeking the
custody of the child. When Vishaka objected stating that the
child is still a minor and thus his custody need to be with her,
Mr. Hamid claimed that as per Muslim law the mother will not
have any right of Guardianship of a male child and hence he is
entitled for the custody of the child. However Vishaka contenting
that even though they both practiced Ismail post marriage, their
marriage was solemnised as per the ~—- Hindu
Rites, Rituals, Customs & Traditions.
Prepare written submission on behalf of both parties.
|
yoy