3 legal insistence cases were examined in the Supreme Court – Mehr news agency Iran and world’s news

According to the Mehr news agency, citing the public relations of the Supreme Court, the meeting of the general board in connection with urgent legal cases was held today, Tuesday, the 15th of December, with the presence of Hojjatul-Islam wal-Muslimeen Mortazavi Moghadam and high-ranking judges of the Supreme Court.

In the agenda of this week’s session of the General Board of the Supreme Court, there are cases related to the request for divorce evening Embarrassment and distaste for the spouse, divorce suit due to violation of the conditions in the marriage and suit for dispossession of several pieces of land; was discussed.

Examining the legal insistence case with the subject of the claim of expropriation of several pieces of land / the need for the courts to pay attention to the official ownership documents

In a case related to usurpation of a piece of cultivated land Demi and a piece of residential land with an area of ​​300 square meters, the petitioner by presenting documents and pledge Letters have raised the claim of ownership and the defendant, while denying his claim, has stated that “the plaintiff bought the property from another person, he and his ex-boyfriend live in another neighborhood, and even their father did not own the property”.

The court regardless of the validity and Soqm The statements of the parties, in the issuance of the decision, cited that although the ownership of the applicants for registration in the mentioned license plate is stated as joint, but according to the existing custom, joint owners of agricultural lands and villages, share their shares in the form of Marfooz Al-Rahiyah are in possession, and in this case, the petitioner has no record of possession of the said lands, and only by buying the shares of some owners, he filed a petition for expropriation, and the response to his request causes chaos and Mr J And the anxiety of the common owners since ancient times Alayam as Marfooz Al-Rahiyah They will settle in their lands, therefore documents According to Articles 2 and 197 of the Civil Procedure Law, the plaintiff’s claim has been rejected.

With the petitioner’s appeal, the fifth branch of the Supreme Court declared that the ownership of the appellant, even if it is shared, is confirmed and verified according to Article 22 of the Registration Law, and the court has the duty to deal with it, therefore, by referring the matter to an expert and investigating Seizures Mahroozi Ayeadi, the previous petitioner, referred the case to the same branch for re-examination.
The same court (Branch 2 of the General Court of Kamijan) also issued an order not to hear the lawsuit regarding the claim of expropriation of 300 square meters of land, considering that the petitioner’s document is normal. planted Demi Arguing that the petitioner in Assumptions Introduced has no possessions and does not have specific limits and area, it has confirmed the primary decision, so the case was brought up in the general board of the Supreme Court for insistence.

The judges of the legal branches of the Supreme Court of Iran and the representative of the story, after discussing the issue and examining the formal and substantive flaws of the case, finally voted with the majority of the fifth branch because of the emphasis on the need to pay attention to the official ownership documents. Based on Article 22 of the Registration Law, Unanimous Decision No. 672 of the General Board of the Supreme Court, found the clarity of the selected expert’s theory on the plaintiff’s joint ownership and his previous submissions and the lack of submission of the document by the defendant to be correct.

The judges stated that the official document is valid to the extent that it is emphasized even in the case of aggressive possession and that the alleged possession does not have the same validity as the ownership document.

It should be noted: 53 of the total 62 judges present at the session of the General Board approved the decision of the fifth branch of the Supreme Court. confirmation they did

Examining the divorce lawsuit due to evening And the embarrassment and violation of the couple from the condition included in the contract

The report of the case insistence on the demand for divorce evening And the penalty for violating the condition of the contract (abandonment) was read in today’s meeting of the Supreme Court.

In this case, the husband was sentenced to pay alimony and refused to pay it, and when the wife filed a divorce case; He is paying alimony, on the other hand, the claim for the obligation to comply has also been rejected due to the lack of provision of a residential house.

In this regard, the couple stated: “I love my life and I will not divorce him. I have paid the dowry and paid the alimony in full. My wife has been living together for about 5 years.”

The third branch of the Court of Appeals of Qazvin province did not consider the reasons presented by the petitioner to be sufficient and issued a ruling to invalidate the claim.

In this meeting, the judges discussed and analyzed the disagreement between the third branch of the Court of Appeal of Qazvin province and the 37th branch of the Supreme Court of the country, and finally the decision of the 37th branch of the Supreme Court of the country with the argument that the couple was sentenced to pay arrears and current alimony, but in During the hearing of the divorce case, he tried to implement the alimony order, which was done in order to prevent the wife from exercising her acquired rights due to the fulfillment of the conditions included in the contract contained in the document. Marriage have been; (However, this issue also causes the wife’s right to exercise the power of attorney granted in the document Marriage It will not be possible) and also rejected the announcement of the mandatory compliance ruling.

Out of a total of 59 judges present at the general board meeting, 54 approved the decision of the 37th branch of the Supreme Court.

Examining the insistence legal case of divorce with the subject evening embarrassment misbehavior And your hatred of the couple

Judges of the legal branches of the General Board regarding the insistence case with the subject of the claim evening And the severe embarrassment of the wife misbehavior And they discussed and investigated.
In this case, a lady (petitioner) filed a petition for divorce in terms of evening He was deeply embarrassed and disgusted and filed a lawsuit and declared, “He has been married since 1981 and has a 17-year-old child; now, the couple has left the house for 3 years and they are having a serious disagreement.”

The wife claims, because misbehavior The husband’s violence, assault and rape in the apartment, which is also approved by the residents, is ready to pay 50 million Tomans to the couple at the time of divorce.
The couple has also announced; “I am not willing to divorce, I have given the dowry, my wife has been sentenced to obey and she has not obeyed, I am not willing to divorce for 50 million tomans and I have given her an apartment.”

The second branch of the Maragheh family court and the 5th branch of the East Azerbaijan Court of Appeals by examining the case and citing that the assault caused misbehavior It is not, and hatred does not cause divorce when the husband does not accept the dowry, he has declared the wife’s claim rejected.
In relation to this decision, the wife requested an appeal, and by accepting her appeal in the 15th branch of the Supreme Court, this branch, by examining the case and the available documents, including the police investigation report and the theory of the welfare advisers, on the impossibility of compromise, the lack of listening to statements and The testimony of witnesses, referring to paragraph 5 of article 371 and paragraph a of article 401 of the Code of Civil Procedure, remands the case to the court issuing the judgment for retrial. Expired has referred

Court uncle The appeal (Branch 33 of the Court of Appeals) also with the argument that the wife was sentenced to subjugation and the subjugation order is arbitrary misbehavior excludes , even for misbehavior And the assault has not been convicted, and the family court cannot replace the criminal court misbehavior to prove and mere dislike does not cause divorce, the primary decision confirmation has done, so the case was brought up in the general board of the Supreme Court in order to be persistent.
Judges around this issue that claim misbehavior And they debated whether or not the abomination raised in the case is a reason for divorce, and finally, after examining the case and discussing and exchanging opinions, they found the decision of the 15th branch to be correct.

According to the decision of the 15th branch of the Supreme Court of Iran, simply obtaining a submissive order from the spouse cannot cause hatred and misbehavior exclude the couple contrary to the reasoning of the Court of Appeal, therefore, considering this issue and the testimony of 3 witnesses to misbehavior Couple, police report and local investigation, forensic medical certificate and non-payment of alimony are examples evening And it was considered offensive.
Out of a total of 62 judges present at the general board meeting, 59 approved the decision of the 15th branch of the Supreme Court.
I have to say; Hojjat al-Islam wal-Muslimin Mortazavi Moghadam explained some of the achievements of the trip to Russia at the end of the general board meeting.