Kindly call on 022 26111281 or on 9322286663 and take prior appointment for setting up meetings / conference at Head Office i.e "Siddhartha Shah & Associates, Advocates, 11 Hamam House, ground floor, Hamam street, next to Bombay stock exchange, Fort Mumbai -23.
Email : "email@example.com".
Legal Professional meeting charges shall be on hourly basis. which kindly confirm before booking the meeting.
In the case of Tejaswini vs Aravinda Tejas Chandra, the issue which arose was whether the expression unable to maintain herself meant capable of earning. In this case the wife was a holder of a post graduation degree a MBA graduate, and the maintenance under section 125 of the CRPC was dismissed on the above ground.
In a revision petition filed,the court placed reliance on the Supreme Courts case of Rajathi vs Ganesan. The court construed that the words unable to maintain herself does not lay emphasis on the wife to earn herself. If that would be the meaning then all petitions under 125 crpc of maintenance would be dismissed.
Hence, under this section if the husband neglects to maintain his wife, the petition of maintenance cannot be rejected solely on the ground that the wife is capable for earning for herself. Hence the impugned order of the trial court was set aside.
Click here to view judgement