Generally, a rule nisi is an order “to show cause” , meaning that the ruling is absolute unless the party to whom it applies can show cause why it should not apply. In divorce cases, a rule nisi is issued by the court to tell the parties that they have to wait a certain period of time before making their divorce final. This is to allow time for anyone who objects to the divorce to tell the court why they object. The rule nisi can often be set aside with mutual consent of the spouses. When the period expires, they can apply for the "decree absolute", which means the divorce is completed and the partners are no longer married. it is also called a decree nisi. Some states grant divorces using decrees nisi.

 

Pasted from <http://definitions.uslegal.com/r/rule-nisi/>




CASE LAW

7. In this context, it would also be useful to refer to the facts in the case of Prem Chand v. Excise Commr., U. P., . In that case, the Supreme Court itself had by a judicial order made at the time of issuing a rule nisi on a petition under Article 32imposed the condition that the petitioner should make a deposit of a specified sum as security for costs, as a condition precedent for the hearing of the petition under Article 32.

The power to call for such security was conferred by Order 35, Rule 12 of the Rules made by the Court under Article 145 of the Constitution, The majority of the Court held that the rule-making power of the Court was subject to the fundamental right and that the right to move the Supreme Court under Article 32 was a guaranteed right which could not be defeated by any Rule made by the Supreme Court, imposing a condition precedent at the threshold of the hearing, so that in case of non-compliance of the condition, the petitioner would not be heard at all. The Court, therefore, not only struck down the Rule in question, which conferred such power, as invalid, but also "set aside" the Court's own judicial order "calling upon the petitioners to furnish security," presumably because it became without jurisdiction and void as soon as the Rule which conferred the power to make such order was pronounced void. The decision in Premchand's case was reviewed and upheld by the majority in Naresh Sridhar Mirajkar v. State of Maharashtra, .

 

Pasted from <http://indiankanoon.org>