The issue before the Bombay High Court was whether the interim maintenance granted to the wife and
the sons were reasonable and if they were excessive. In the following case the petitioner submitted the tax
returns of the last 3 years for the determination of the above issue.
However the court held that it would be
Rohtash Singh vs Smt. Ramendri And Ors on 2 March, 2000 : Special Leave Petition (crl.) 2763 of 1999
This Judgement by the Supreme Court revolves around the issue which is whether a wife against whom a decree for divorce has been passed on account of her deserting the husband can claim Maintenance Allowance under Section
The reasons laid
Manokaran @ Ramamoorthy vs M. Devaki on 21 February, 2003 Wherein a wife was earning more than her husband who was himself earning merely Rs. 2000 per month, the Family Court Madras had passed an order wherein the said man was meant to pay Rs. 750 to his wife as interim maintenance. Aggrieved by the said order,
Dipti Mohanty @ Kanungo & Another vs Surya Prakash Mohanty on 12 September, 2014
Wherein the wife had left the company of her husband and he had gotten a decree for restitution of conjugal rights, the wife’s own maintenance application was rejected by the Cuttack Family Court . It is the contention of the husband (the
The Delhi High Court has held that “Family‟, being the natural and fundamental unit of society, is entitled to protection of its integrity against arbitrary interference by the State.” Hence when a Pakistani woman was residing in India on a long term visa, a notice was served on her to leave India within 15 days from
In this particular judgement, the Punjab and Haryana High Court tackled two questions of importance: Whether the plaintiff-appellant (an unmarried daughter) is entitled to the grant of maintenance till she gets married, as required under Section 21 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 Answering this particular question, the court was of the opinion
Dr. A. Jairam vs Dr. A. Suman on 9 May, 2005 In this particular judgement, the Rajasthan High Court dismissed the appeal of a husband who claimed that he was not entitled to pay maintenance to his two minor sons as his wife was working as a government employee and was earning over Rs. 25,000 p.m.
The Allahabad High Court has held that forcible sex, unnatural sex, sodomy caused against the wishes of the wife, and which degrades the dignity of the wife is not only a criminal offence but a good ground for dissolution of marriage under section 13 of the Hindu marriage Act. The above judgement is in conformity with
The term economic abuse falls under the purview of domestic violence as provided in section 3 of the Domestic Violence Act. In the case decided by the Bombay High Court of Sapna Patel vs Ishwarbhai Patel and others, the Court upheld the decision of the first class magistrate. In the following case, the deceased husband earned
In the case of Ajay kumar vs Lata Sharuti, the husband and the brother in law were engaged in a business where they held ancestral joint hindu property and carried on the business of Kiryana store. The wife and the husband resided in the same house on the ground floor. On the death of the husband,
The Supreme Court in the case of Accused X vs the State of Maharashtra held that post conviction illness is a good ground and a mitigating factor to commute death sentence to life imprisonment. . In the above case, the mitigating factor was determined after the conviction. In the following case, X had mercilessly raped and
Whether filing false affidavit, document or statement on oath falls under the purview of contempt of court ? Section 2(a) of the Contempt of Court Act defines contempt as criminal contempt and civil contempt. The filing of false affidavits, forged documents and false statement on oaths falls under criminal contempt of court. Such admissions obstructs, impedes and
Requirements to extend remand beyond 90 days explained by the Supreme Court : The Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) provides that an accused can be kept in remand for a period of 90 days. However, a proviso to this under 43(D) 2b of the UAPA provides that such remand can be extended beyond 90 days if
The Himachal Pradesh high court quashed the FIR lodged against actor Jeetendra, who was alleged to have sexually assaulted his cousin. The incident was alleged to have taken place in 1971 and the FIR was filed after 47 years. This FIR was quashed on the grounds of: a. Inordinate delay to file FIR : Section 468
In another such landmark judgement, the Uttrakhand HC has been of the opinion that a wife separating her husband from his mother would amount to cruelty. an integral a part