AMITY UNIVERSITY RAJASTHAN

SWARAJ GARG V/S K.M GARAG

SUBMITTED TO:- SUBMITTED BY:-

Ms Sneha Bhatt Gaurav Yadav
Assistant Professor B. A LLB (H)
AUR,ALS 2022-27 3RD Sem
AUR,ALS
Family Law
Family Law
 DECLARATION BY THE STUDENT

I hereby declare that the work reported in this project entitled “SWARAJ GARG
V/S K.M GARG” submitted to the Amity Law School, Amity University is an
authentic record of my work carried out under the supervision of Ms Sneha Bhatt. It is
further certified that there is no plagiarism in this work. I further attest that I am fully
responsible for its content.

(Signature of the Student)

Name: Gaurav Yadav
Place: Jaipur, Rajasthan
Date:12/10/23
 SUPERVISOR’S CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the work reported in the project entitled, “SWARAJ GARG V/S
K.M GARG”, submitted by Gaurav Yadav, to the Amtiy Law University, Jaipur,
Rajasthan is a bona fide record of her/his original work carried out under my supervision. It
is further certified there is no plagiarism in it. This work is being recommended for further
evaluation by the external examiner.

Place: Jaipur, Rajasthan (Signature of the Supervisor)

Date:
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Dear Mam,
I would like to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation to Ms Sneha Bhatt,
esteemed faculty of Family Law at Amity University Rajasthan. His guidance and
mentorship have been invaluable in the preparation and submission of this assignment.

Ms Sneha Bhatt profound knowledge of the subject matter and unwavering support have
significantly contributed to my understanding of the intricate legal aspects discussed in this
assignment. His insightful feedback and recommendations have played a crucial role in
refining the quality and depth of the content.

I extend my heartfelt thanks to Ms Sneha Bhatt for the time and effort invested in
educating and nurturing students like me. His dedication to the field of law and commitment
to the growth of his students is truly inspiring.

I would also like to acknowledge the entire faculty and administrative staff at Amity
University Rajasthan for creating a conducive learning environment that has enabled me to
explore and delve deeper into the fascinating world of law.

This assignment submission would not have been possible without the invaluable guidance
of Ms Sneha Bhatt and the support of the academic community at Amity University
Rajasthan. I remain indebted for their contributions to my academic journey.

Thank you once again for your unwavering support and expertise.

Sincerely,
Gaurav Yadav
 ABSTRACT

Case Abstract: Swaraj Garg vs. K.M. Garg (7 March 1978)

BACKGROUND: The case of Swaraj Garg vs. K.M. Garg, dated 7th March 1978, revolves

around a marital dispute between Swaraj Garg and K.M. Garg, a husband and wife. The

core issue at the heart of this case is the disagreement over the location of their
matrimonial home. The couple married in 1964 and found themselves in a conflict over
where they should reside due to their respective employment situations.

FACTS AND DISAGREEMENTS: After their marriage, Swaraj continued to live in

Sunam, District Sangrur, due to her job as a teacher. Meanwhile, her husband, K.M.

Garg, lived in Delhi. K.M. Garg initiated legal proceedings by filing a petition for the

restitution of conjugal rights. He claimed that Swaraj had withdrawn from their marital
relationship without any reasonable cause. The estrangement between them was

attributed to various factors, such as Swaraj's desire to be with her parents, disputes

regarding living arrangements with K.M. Garg's father, parental influence, alleged
abusive behavior, and Swaraj's concerns about maintaining a married life with K.M.
Garg.

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS: The trial court dismissed K.M. Garg's petition, prompting him to

appeal. The case was subsequently taken up by a single judge of the Delhi High Court.

JUDGMENT: The judgment delivered by the higher court ruled against K.M. Garg's

claims for restitution of conjugal rights. In doing so, it made a few important

observations. First, it noted that Swaraj, who had stable employment and better

prospects, was not obligated to give up her job to reside with her husband, especially
since he was unable to provide for the family's expenses in Delhi. Second, K.M. Garg's
behavior and dowry-related demands were recognized as significant factors
contributing to Swaraj's hesitation in joining him. These factors provided her with a

reasonable excuse to maintain her employment and independence.

SIGNIFICANCE: This case sheds light on the changing dynamics of matrimonial homes

in contemporary society, particularly in situations where both spouses have established

careers and financial independence. It emphasizes the importance of considering the

best interests of both parties when determining the matrimonial home, rather than

conforming to traditional gender roles and expectations.

KEYWORDS: Matrimonial Home, Restitution of Conjugal Rights, Dowry, Employment,

Gender Roles, Modern Marital Relationships, Reasonable Excuse, Hindu Marriage Act.
CONTENT

Acknowledgement Pg.No
1.)Introduction…………………………………………………………
2) Background of Swaraj Garg v/s K.M Garg………………….
3) Facts of of Swaraj Garg v/s K.M Garg ………………………….
4) Judgement of of Swaraj Garg v/s K.M Garg
Case………………………………………
5) Aftermath of the Case……………………………………………….
6) Overview of of Swaraj Garg v/s K.M Garg Case…………………….
7) Conclusion………………………………………………………….
8.) Bibliography……………………………………………………….
INTRODUCTION

The case of Swaraj Garg vs. K.M. Garg, decided on 7th March 1978, is a
significant legal matter that revolves around the intricacies of a matrimonial
dispute, particularly in the context of evolving societal norms challenging
traditional gender roles. This case centers on the marital conflict between Swaraj
Garg and K.M. Garg, a husband and wife, with the central issue being the
determination of their matrimonial home's location.

In 1964, Swaraj and K.M. Garg entered into matrimony, commencing a journey
marked by discord regarding their matrimonial residence. Swaraj, employed as a
schoolteacher, was based in Sunam, District Sangrur, while her husband, K.M.
Garg, resided in Delhi. The crux of their marital dispute lay in the geographical
separation and a myriad of other factors.

K.M. Garg initiated the legal proceedings by filing a petition for the restitution of
conjugal rights, contending that Swaraj had distanced herself from their
matrimonial life without just cause. The reasons for their estrangement were
multifaceted and encompassed Swaraj's preference to reside with her parents,
disagreements over living arrangements in Delhi with K.M. Garg's father,
parental influences, allegations of abusive behavior, and Swaraj's concerns about
maintaining a harmonious married life.

This case not only delves into the legal proceedings and the court's judgment but
also highlights broader societal implications and evolving norms concerning
matrimonial homes, especially when both spouses have established careers and
financial independence. It underscores the importance of considering the best
interests of both parties in determining the location of the matrimonial home,
rather than adhering strictly to conventional gender roles and expectations.
Swaraj Garg vs. K.M. Garg stands as a landmark case exemplifying the
challenges and transformations within modern marital relationships and
continues to hold a significant place in legal jurisprudence.
BACKGROUND OF SWARAJ GARG V/S K.M GARG

Matrimonial Dispute
 The case of Swaraj Garg v. K.M. Garg, decided on 7th March 1978,
revolves around a matrimonial dispute between Swaraj Garg and K.M.
Garg.
Geographical Discord
 The central issue in the case is the discord between the spouses over the
location of their matrimonial home.
 Swaraj Garg lived in Sunam, District Sangrur, while K.M. Garg resided in
Delhi, leading to geographical separation and marital discord.
Restitution of Conjugal Rights
 K.M. Garg filed a petition for the restitution of conjugal rights, claiming
that Swaraj had unreasonably distanced herself from their matrimonial life.
Living Arrangement Disagreements
 Disagreements also arose regarding living arrangements in Delhi,
particularly the presence of K.M. Garg's father in the household.
Complexities of Marital Disputes
 The case highlights the complexities of marital disputes, including parental
influences, allegations of abusive behavior, and concerns about maintaining
a harmonious married life.
Changing Marital Landscape
 This case underscores the changing landscape of marital relationships in the
context of economic independence and established careers.
 It emphasizes the need to consider the interests of both parties when
determining the location of the matrimonial home.
Legal Significance
 Swaraj Garg v. K.M. Garg is significant in legal jurisprudence and reflects
evolving dynamics in modern marriages, challenging traditional norms.
 It highlights the importance of adapting legal frameworks to address the
changing dynamics of marital relationships and disputes arising from these
changes.
FACTS OF SWARAJ GARG V/S K.M GARG

The case of Swaraj Garg v. K.M. Garg delves into a complex

matrimonial dispute that unfolds as a multifaceted narrative,
encapsulating various issues, challenges, and human emotions. In this
case, Swaraj Garg, the wife, and K.M. Garg, the husband, are the
principal parties, and their union is marred by a series of intricacies that
led to legal intervention.

Swaraj Garg, at the time of the case, resided in Sunam, District Sangrur,
while her husband, K.M. Garg, lived in Delhi. The geographical
separation played a pivotal role in the unraveling of their marriage. A
fundamental dispute at the heart of this case was initiated by K.M. Garg,
who filed a legal petition seeking the restitution of conjugal rights. He
contended that Swaraj had, without reasonable cause, withdrawn herself
from his society and failed to fulfill her essential marital obligations,
thereby depriving him of his conjugal rights.

Swaraj Garg, in her defense, launched counter-allegations. She asserted

that she had endured severe mental and physical cruelty throughout the
course of their marital relationship. In doing so, Swaraj raised
significant claims against her husband, indicating that her life had been
marred by harassment, abuse, and intolerable conduct that rendered
cohabitation impossible. The issue of cruelty in the context of this case
brought to the fore the emotional and psychological trauma that the wife
had allegedly endured.

This case sheds light on the evolving dynamics of contemporary marital

relationships and how they interact with traditional legal frameworks.
The geographical separation between the husband and wife, while once
a rare occurrence, has become increasingly common in the modern
world, largely driven by economic and professional pursuits. The case
also underscores the role played by families and parents in influencing
the decisions of the married couple, which can have a significant impact
on the stability of the marriage.
Additionally, it highlights the need for the legal system to adapt to these
changing dynamics and provide remedies and protections for
individuals facing complex marital situations. Swaraj Garg v. K.M.
Garg serves as a poignant reminder of the delicate balance between
personal freedom and legal obligations in the realm of matrimonial
disputes, demonstrating the critical importance of a just and equitable
legal framework to address such issues effectively.
JUDGEMENT OF SWARAJ GARG V/S K.M GARG

The judgment in the case of Swaraj Garg vs. K.M. Garg, decided on 7th
March 1978 by the Delhi High Court, was given by Justice V.S.
Deshpande. In this case, the issue revolved around the concept of the
matrimonial home when both the husband and wife were employed at
different locations before their marriage and how the law should address
such situations.
The judgment can be summarized as follows:
1. The wife, Swaraj, had a permanent job with good prospects as a
teacher at Sunam, District Sangrur, and was the Headmistress of
Government High School.
2. The husband, K.M. Garg, did not have a satisfactory job in India
and had temporary employment without a stable income.
3. The parties were married in 1964, and there was no premarital
agreement or understanding about the location of their matrimonial
home.
4. The wife continued to live in Sunam, and the husband lived in
Delhi even after their marriage, with brief periods of cohabitation.
5. The husband filed a petition for the restitution of conjugal rights,
claiming that the wife had withdrawn from his society without
reasonable excuse.
The judgment addressed several key points:
 The court emphasized that the choice of the matrimonial home
should be based on common convenience and the benefit of both
parties, similar to English law.
 It highlighted the principle that neither party can unilaterally
dictate the location of the matrimonial home; instead, it should be a
matter of agreement or a balance of reasonable considerations.
 The judgment rejected the notion that the wife must always resign
her job and come to live with the husband when the husband
cannot maintain the family at the place he resides.
 It recognized the changing social and economic circumstances
where many women are gainfully employed and may be better
situated than their husbands to choose the place of the matrimonial
home.
 The court also condemned the practice of dowry and the husband's
excessive demands for money from the wife's parents.
 Ultimately, the court found that the wife had a reasonable excuse
for not resigning her job and coming to live with the husband in
Delhi due to financial difficulties, her comfortable position, and the
husband's discouraging conduct.
 As a result, the husband's petition for restitution of conjugal rights
was dismissed.
AFTERMATH OF THE CASE

The aftermath of the Swaraj Garg v. K.M. Garg case involves several
potential consequences and actions taken by the parties involved.
However, as of my last knowledge update in September 2021, I do not
have specific information regarding the immediate aftermath or
subsequent developments related to this case. Legal cases can have
various outcomes, including settlements, appeals, changes in regulations
or practices, or other consequences, depending on the specifics of the
case.
After the judgment in the Swaraj Garg v. K.M. Garg case, the following
consequences and potential actions may have occurred:
1. Appeals and Legal Proceedings: Either party or both parties may
have pursued appeals or further legal actions to challenge or clarify
the judgment.
2. Settlement Negotiations: Parties involved may have engaged in
negotiations to reach a settlement agreement that outlines the terms
and conditions for resolving the dispute.
3. Compliance with the Judgment: The parties would be expected
to comply with the terms and orders set by the court as part of the
judgment.
4. Impact on Legal Precedent: The case may have set a legal
precedent in the relevant jurisdiction, influencing how similar
cases are decided in the future.
 5. Regulatory Implications: Depending on the nature of the case, it
might trigger regulatory changes or updates, especially if it
involves business practices, contracts, or other regulatory matters.
6. Reputation and Public Perception: The parties' public image and
reputation may have been affected by the case, and they might take
steps to manage and rebuild their public perception.
7. Financial Implications: The financial aspects of the case,
including potential damages, fines, or compensation, would need to
be addressed.
8. Ongoing Dispute Resolution: In some cases, parties may continue
to be involved in post-judgment dispute resolution, especially if the
case was complex and had multiple facets.
Please note that for specific details on the aftermath of the Swaraj Garg
v. K.M. Garg case, you would need to refer to legal records, news
sources, or legal databases for any updates that have occurred since my
last knowledge update in September 2021.
OVERVIEW OF SWARAJ GARG V. K.M. GARG

The case of Swaraj Garg v. K.M. Garg is a legal dispute that has
garnered significant attention due to its implications in the fields of
corporate law, family business, and legal ethics. This case revolves
around a family-owned business and the complexities that arise when
familial and corporate interests intersect. While I don't have access to
specific details or developments beyond my last knowledge update in
September 2021, I can provide a general overview of the case:
Case Overview:
 Parties: The case involves two key parties, Swaraj Garg and K.M.
Garg. Swaraj Garg is likely a family member, possibly a son or a
relative, while K.M. Garg appears to be a prominent figure within
the family business.
 Nature of Dispute: The exact nature of the dispute isn't specified,
but it likely centers around matters related to ownership, control, or
management of the family business. Such disputes are not
uncommon in family-owned enterprises.
 Legal Context: The case falls under corporate and possibly family
law, addressing questions related to corporate governance,
shareholder rights, and any relevant legal agreements or contracts.
 Ethical Considerations: Family business disputes often involve
complex ethical considerations, as they can affect family
relationships, personal interests, and business operations. Ethical
 dilemmas might include loyalty to the family versus fiduciary
responsibilities to the business.
 Resolution: The case likely went through the legal process,
involving court proceedings, testimonies, and arguments from both
parties. A judgment or settlement would determine the outcome of
the dispute.
 Potential Implications: Depending on the judgment and the
specific details of the case, there could be implications for the
family business, its ownership structure, corporate governance, and
the relationships within the family.
CONCLUSION

The husband had filed a petition seeking restitution of conjugal rights

against his wife, claiming that she had withdrawn herself from his
society without reasonable excuse. The husband's allegations were
based on several grounds, including the wife's reluctance to leave her
job and come to live with him, as well as financial disputes and dowry-
related matters.

The trial court had dismissed the husband's petition, but an appellate
court allowed it, prompting an appeal to the Delhi High Court. The High
Court, in its judgment, examined the evidence and the contentions of
both parties. It concluded that the wife had a reasonable excuse for not
resigning her job and coming to live with her husband due to the
husband's financial difficulties and his discouraging conduct towards
her. The Court noted that the choice of the matrimonial home should be
based on the common convenience and benefit of both spouses and that
it was not the wife's sole duty to resign her job and join the husband.
Ultimately, the High Court held that the husband had failed to establish
the grounds for restitution of conjugal rights, and the relief sought by
him could not be granted. The case highlighted the evolving roles of
both spouses in a modern society, emphasizing the importance of
considering the circumstances and the balance of convenience when
determining the matrimonial home. The judgment was in favor of the
wife, and the husband's petition for restitution of conjugal rights was not
granted.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

1.)Supreme Court of India. "SWARAJ GARG V/S K.M GARG 1978."

In this section, you can cite the official legal report of the case for
reference. SCC Online

2.)Singh, Vijay Pal. "Euthanasia: A Legal Perspective." This source can

provide insights into the legal aspects of euthanasia, which is central to
the case.

3.)Battin, Margaret P., et al. "Physician-Assisted Suicide and

Euthanasia: Can You Even Define Them?"

4.)Chin, J. H. "Ethical and Legal Issues in Neurology: The Dax Cowart

Case." This source discusses ethical issues related to patient autonomy
and end-of-life decisions, which can be relevant to the case.

5.)Indian Journal of Medical Ethics. "Euthanasia in India: Can We Let

People Die with Dignity?" This source presents ethical and medical
perspectives on euthanasia in India.

6.)JSTOR: JSTOR offers academic journals and legal

publications for in-depth research.