Best Divorce Lawyer Contact Number 8595722509

Digital Arrests Are FAKE – But the Threat Is Real ! 🚨 Cyber-crime is not just a technological issue — it is a human-driven attack on dignity, liberty, and peace of mind. With the surge in fake digital arrests, cyber fraudsters are exploiting fear to rob innocent citizens of their hard-earned money. 📱 As India rapidly embraces UPIs, online payments & digital platforms, the need for strong cyber laws and public vigilance has never been greater. ⚖️ What Is Cyber Law & Why Does It Matter? Cyber Law governs activities in cyberspace — including the internet, mobile phones, computers, emails, ATMs, data storage devices, and digital platforms. Cyber-crime includes fraud, impersonation, cyber bullying, stalking, sextortion, phishing, and identity theft — all rising at an alarming rate. ❌ What Is a “Digital Arrest”? A Digital Arrest is NOT legal. It is a scam where fraudsters pose as CBI, ED, RBI or Police officials, falsely accuse victims of serious crimes, and threaten arrest unless ...

Mutual Consent Divorce Case Lawyer in Delhi, India Fast, Hassle-Free & Legally Compliant Divorce Solutions Are you looking for a mutual consent divorce lawyer in Delhi who can help you end your marriage quickly, legally, and with dignity? Advocate Devashish Maharishi , practicing at Karkardooma Courts, Delhi , provides expert legal assistance in mutual consent divorce cases under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act . With recent landmark rulings by the Delhi High Court , the process of mutual consent divorce has become more flexible, allowing waiver of the mandatory one-year separation period and even the six-month cooling-off period in deserving cases. With the right legal guidance, couples can now obtain divorce without unnecessary delay . Recent Delhi High Court Ruling – Faster Mutual Consent Divorce The Delhi High Court Full Bench has clarified that: ✔ The one-year separation period under Section 13B(1) is not mandatory and can be waived ✔ The six-month cooling-...

Delhi High Court: Husband Cannot Deny Maintenance Citing Wife’s Inherited Property or Family Gifts Landmark Ruling on Maintenance Under Domestic Violence Act In a significant judgment strengthening women’s financial rights, the Delhi High Court has ruled that a husband cannot rely on his wife’s inherited property, stridhan, or gifts received from her parents or relatives to deny or reduce her maintenance claim . Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma clarified that maintenance must be assessed based on the wife’s present earning capacity and the standard of living she enjoyed during the marriage , not the wealth or financial background of her natal family. Key Observation by the Delhi High Court “The stridhan, inherited property, or gifts received by a woman from her parents or relatives cannot be construed as a source of income so as to defeat her claim for maintenance.” Case Background: Interim Maintenance of ₹50,000 Upheld The couple married in December 2018 The wife filed a ...

J&K High Court Dismisses Writ Petition for Suppression of Facts in Kupwara Pathway Dispute Misuse of Article 226 Leads to ₹50,000 Cost | WP(C) No. 3035/2025 Introduction In a strong message against the misuse of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 , the Jammu & Kashmir High Court has dismissed WP(C) No. 3035/2025 – Farooq Ahmed Sheikh vs Financial Commissioner Revenue , imposing a ₹50,000 cost on the petitioners for deliberate suppression of material facts and forum shopping . The judgment reaffirms that litigants must approach constitutional courts with clean hands and full disclosure , particularly when a civil court is already seized of the dispute . Background of the Case The dispute concerned an alleged encroachment over a public village pathway in Kupwara, Jammu & Kashmir . The petitioners challenged a series of administrative orders passed by revenue authorities, namely: Deputy Commissioner Additional Commissioner Financial Commissioner (Revenue) ...

Supreme Court on Dowry Death vs Customary Gifts | Legal Update by Advocate Devashish Maharishi – Best Divorce Lawyer in Karkardooma Court, Delhi Advocate Devashish Maharishi Best Divorce Case Lawyer in Karkardooma Court Delhi Top Family & Matrimonial Dispute Lawyer in Delhi The Supreme Court of India has clarified that demanding gold ornaments during the ‘Chhoochhak’ ceremony—a customary post-childbirth ritual—does not amount to a dowry demand under Section 304B IPC. The Court set aside the husband’s conviction under Dowry Death, while retaining the conviction under Section 498A (Cruelty) , stressing that only demands directly connected to marriage qualify as dowry. As a top divorce lawyer in Karkardooma Court Delhi, I regularly guide clients through complex matrimonial and domestic violence matters involving dowry allegations, cruelty, and marital disputes . 🔹 Legal Services Offered Looking for the best family lawyer in Delhi ? I can help with: ✅ Contested Divorce Case Lawye...

Advocate Devashish Maharishi | Best Divorce case Lawyer in karkardooma Court Delhi Top lawyer for Contested Divorce case, Restitution of Conjugal Rights, Domestic violence case, CAW cell Complaint case, Quashing petition and for Mutual Consent Divorce case in Delhi 📞 Need Legal Help? If you're facing domestic abuse or going through a complex matrimonial dispute, I’m here to help. I offer consultations for: ✅ Mutual or contested divorce case ✅ Domestic violence protection ✅ Maintenance case, Alimony case Or Interim maintenance and custody ✅ Transfer petitions and NRI divorce matters 📍 Office: 137, J-Extension, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi, 110092 📞 Contact: 8595722509

📌 Case Update | Civil Law | Order VII Rule 11 CPC Sunil Singh v. Krishan Lal Gupta RFA No. 20 of 2021 | Decided on 08-11-2025 The Jammu & Kashmir & Ladakh High Court (Rahul Bharti, J.) upheld the Trial Court’s rejection of a plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC , holding that the plaintiff failed to disclose a cause of action and didn’t establish any legal right or ownership over the suit property. The Court reaffirmed that: ✔️ A plaint must clearly state facts constituting a cause of action. ✔️ Courts cannot rely on the defence version while deciding O7R11—only the plaint matters. ✔️ Rejection of plaint is a drastic power but necessary when the suit is meritless at the threshold. Authorities relied upon: 🔸 Raj Narain Sarin v. Laxmi Devi (2002) 10 SCC 501 🔸 Dahiben v. Arvindbhai Kalyanji Bhanusali (2020) 7 SCC 366 Result: Appeal dismissed. Trial Court order upheld. ✨ Need Expert Legal Help? If you’re facing issues related to: ⚖️ Civil Property Disputes ⚖️ Declaratory Suit...