Remarriage of Divorced Persons


Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act ,1955 provides for remarriage of divorced persons  in contested divorce cases.

 “15. Divorced persons when may marry again.—When a marriage has been dissolved by a decree of divorce and either there is no right of appeal against the decree or, if there is such a right of appeal, the time for appealing has expired without an appeal having been presented, or an appeal has been presented but has been dismissed, it shall be lawful for either party to the marriage to marry again.”

The provision of Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 has been subject matter of a recent decision of the Supreme Court in Krishnaveni Rai v. Pankaj Rai and Anr., (2020) 11 SCC 253. In that case the ex-husband of appellant wife remarried as no appeal was filed within period of limitation. The appeal was preferred by the appellant wife almost one year after the expiry of period of limitation. In this factual backdrop, the Supreme Court held that bar of Section 15 was not attracted, it was lawful for the ex-husband to remarry and the appeal was infructous from the inception. The relevant extract of the judgment reads as under:

“28. Section 15 clarifies that when a marriage has been dissolved by a decree of divorce, and there is no right of appeal against the decree, or if there is such a right of appeal, the time for appealing has expired without an appeal having been preferred, or an appeal has been presented but the same has been dismissed, it shall be lawful for either party to the marriage to marry again. Had it been the legislative intent that a marriage during the pendency of an appeal should be declared void, Section 11 would expressly have provided so.

  1. As held by this Court in Anurag Mittal v. Shaily Mishra Mittal [Anurag Mittal v. Shaily Mishra Mittal, (2018) 9 SCC 691 : (2018) 4 SCC (Civ) 550] , the object of Section 15 is to provide protection to the person who had filed an appeal against the decree of dissolution of marriage and to ensure that such appeal was not frustrated. The protection afforded by Section 15 is primarily to a person contesting the decree of divorce. As observed by Bobde, J. in his concurring judgment in Anurag Mittal [Anurag Mittal v. Shaily Mishra Mittal, (2018) 9 SCC 691 : (2018) 4 SCC (Civ) 550] : (SCC pp. 702-703, paras 31 & 33)

“I am in agreement with the view taken by Nageswara Rao, J. but it is necessary to state how the question before us has already been settled by the decision in Lila Gupta v. Laxmi Narain [Lila Gupta v. Laxmi Narain, (1978) 3 SCC 258] . Even when the words of the proviso were found to be prohibitory in clear negative terms — “it shall not be lawful”, etc., this Court held that the incapacity to marry imposed by the proviso did not lead to an inference of nullity, vide para 9 of Lila Gupta [Lila Gupta v. Laxmi Narain, (1978) 3 SCC 258] . It is all the more difficult to infer nullity when there is no prohibition; where there are no negative words but on the other hand positive words like “it shall be lawful”. Assuming that a marriage contracted before it became lawful to do so was unlawful and the words create a disability, it is not possible to infer a nullity or voidness vide paras 9 and 10 of Lila Gupta case [Lila Gupta v. Laxmi Narain, (1978) 3 SCC 258] . …

  1. What is held in essence is that if a provision of law prescribes an incapacity to marry and yet the person marries while under that incapacity, the marriage would not be void in the absence of an express provision that declares nullity. Quae incapacity imposed by statute, there is no difference between an incapacity imposed by negative language such as “it shall not be lawful” or an incapacity imposed by positive language like “it shall be lawful (in certain conditions, in the absence of which it is impliedly unlawful)”. It would thus appear that the law is already settled by this Court that a marriage contracted during a prescribed period will not be void because it was contracted under an incapacity. Obviously, this would have no bearing on the other conditions of a valid marriage. The decision in Lila Gupta case [Lila Gupta v. Laxmi Narain, (1978) 3 SCC 258] thus covers the present case on law.”
  2. In any case, the bar of Section 15 is not at all attracted in the facts and circumstances of this case, where the appeal from the decree of divorce had been filed almost a year after expiry of the period of limitation for filing an appeal. Section 15 permits a marriage after dissolution of a marriage if there is no right of appeal against the decree, or even if there is such a right to appeal, the time of appealing has expired without an appeal having been presented, or the appeal has been presented but has been dismissed. In this case, no appeal had been presented within the period prescribed by limitation.
  3. The bar, if any, under Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act applies only if there is an appeal filed within the period of limitation, and not afterwards upon condonation of delay in filing an appeal unless of course, the decree of divorce is stayed or there is an interim order of court, restraining the parties or any of them from remarrying during the pendency of the appeal.

Reference of various judgments are available in here

It can therefore be concluded that a divorce person who has availed a divorce decree without any fraudulent means may remarry after the expiry of the period of limitation for the opposite party to file an appeal. For more information kindly click here


Articles/Blogs Online Consultation

Online Lawyer Consultation

Online Lawyer Consultation Kolkata

Onilne lawyer consultation kolkata or online lawyer consultation in kolkata as you may call it , there are various  possibilities for online legal advice. Here are several possibilities:  is an online active  service that links clients seeking legal  assistance and advice with Kolkata-based  lawyers  providing a  variety of legal services, including those related to corporation law, family law, and property law.  is a team of skilled lawyers proficient in family laws or matrimonial laws as is otherwise known completely focused   on various legal areas  and provide clients with one on one legal counsel.

      Best Law firm in Kolkata

Best  law firm  can be adjudged only on the basis on how a law firm maintains confidentiality and provides accurate information to clients on the proceedings  and one of the ways is engaging Taps9 Law Chamber is a one such law firm that will give you all that you need with 100 percent accuracy .

        Top 10 lawyers in Kolkata

Advocate Tapan Choudhury is one such lawyer who will give you a person assistance on every aspect of your case. He believes in giving his best for his clients and therefore if one has to choose  one amongst the best lawyers in kolkata , it should be Advocate Tapan Choudhury without a doubt.

Divorce Lawyer in Kolkata near me

All you need to do is log on to and you will find your divorce lawyer near you , just a click away.  One you consult you will know you have come to the right place . Its also important to note that a lawyer maintains confidentiality and works wholeheartedly for his client. Online Lawyer Consultation Kolkata is the best way to choose a lawyer near you and is definitely one law portals for lawyers that would find mention on top of google search engine


Online top divorce lawyers in kolkata

You will find your choice of lawyers at . you are just a click away from choosing your destiny.


Articles/Blogs Trade Mark



To believe that just  mere registration of a trade mark   would  mean a trade mark is common to trade is not a correct understanding and therefore it is important to deal with the subject of trade mark infringers who would not create any harm by use of a simiar trade mark. .  Insignificant infringers of trade marks The Division Bench of this the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi  in Pankaj Goel v. Dabur India Ltd. has been clear on this point which reads as under:

―21. As far as the Appellant’s argument that the word MOLA is common to the trade and that variants of MOLA are available in the market, we find that the Appellant has not been able to prima facie prove that the said ‘infringers’ had significant business turnover or they posed a threat to Plaintiff’s distinctiveness. In fact, we are of the view that the Respondent/Plaintiff is not expected to sue all small type infringers who may not be affecting Respondent/Plaintiff business. The Supreme Court in National Bell v. Metal Goods , has held that a proprietor of a trademark need not take action against infringement which do not cause prejudice to its distinctiveness. In Express Bottlers Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Pepsi Inc. , it has been held as under:—

… To establish the plea of common use, the use by other persons should be shown to be substantial. In the present case, there is no evidence regarding the extent of the trade carried on by the alleged infringers or their respective position in the trade. If the proprietor of the mark is expected to pursue each and every insignificant infringer to save his mark, the business will come to a standstill. Because there may be occasion when the malicious persons, just to harass the proprietor may use his mark by way of pinpricks…. The mere use of the name is irrelevant because a registered proprietor is not expected to go on filing suits or proceedings against infringers who are of no consequence… Mere delay in taking action against the infringers is not sufficient to hold that the registered proprietor has lost the mark intentionally unless it is positively proved that delay was due to intentional abandonment of the right over the registered mark. This Court is inclined to accept the submissions of the respondent No. 1 on this point… The respondent No. 1 did not lose its mark by not proceeding against insignificant infringers…

In fact, in Dr. Reddy Laboratories v. Reddy Paharmaceuticals,  a Single Judge of  the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi  has held as under:—

…the owners of trade marks or copy rights are not expected to run after every infringer and thereby remain involved in litigation at the cost of their business time. If the impugned infringement is too trivial or insignificant and is not capable of harming their business interests, they may overlook and ignore petty violations till they assume alarming proportions. If a road side Dhaba puts up a board of ―Taj Hotel‖, the owners of Taj Group are not expected to swing into action and raise objections forthwith. They can wait till the time the user of their name starts harming their business interest and starts misleading and confusing their customers.

The Division Bench of the Hon’ble High  Court of Delhi  in Sun Pharmaceutical Laboratories Ltd. v. Hetero Healthcare Ltd. , has stated  thus:

―38. In the case of Panacea Biotec Ltd. v. Recon Ltd8 , the plaintiff was using the trademark ‗NIMULID‘ and had filed a suit for injunction against the defendant for using the mark ‗REMULIDE‘ in relation to the same medicine with the API being ‗NIMESULIDE. This Court held that when the name is derived or coined from the name of the principal ingredient being used in the manufacture of the drug, no distinctiveness or exclusiveness can be claimed by the manufacturer. The said decision is applicable to the facts of this case as well; the mark  LETROZ‘ is nothing but a short name of the active ingredient  LETROZOLE‘.

Therefore not in all cases would a trade mark infringement case would be entertained if it is seen that there is no significance of such an infringment  that would in any way harm the Plaintiff in case of suit.

For more information kindly click here




Divorce lawyer fees in kolkata

Divorce lawyer fees in kolkata

Divorce lawyer fees in kolkata  is a tricky question , these factors depend on experience of an an advocate  that apart  there are several factors like  the intricacy of the case, the length of the procedures, the lawyer’s experience, expertise, and reputation.

Whom to choose as a Divorce Lawyer in Kolkata

Divorce lawyer in kolkata 

Advocate Tapan Choudhury  charges no fees for filing matters in kolkata related to divorce.  Furthur charges are dependent on the complexity of the case. In case of Mutual consent divorce the fees is very negligible as there are no issues to be adjudicated upon by the court . The only ground however is temperamental differences. Whether the court will allow a mutual consent divorce or not is completely dependent upon the discretion of the court . The court would first see whether it is a valid marriage and secondly the parties are living separately for more than a year.

Divorce lawyer in kolkata

All you need to do is visit the lawyers office at Kolkata for consultation and once satisfied and you feel that your budget allows you to feel comfortable with the divorce lawyer fees in kolkata you have the choice to moving ahead with your case.  Law Office of Advocate Tapan Choudhury makes your work easy as they maintain 100 percent confidentiality and is focussed on efficiency. You will be informed of every step of the case.

For furthur queries you may get in touch at 

All your queries will be answered by highly experience lawyers at




Click one of our contacts below to chat on WhatsApp