SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1969 Supreme(AP) 68

MOHD.MIRZA
Imam Saheb – Appellant
Versus
Hajju Bee – Respondent


( 1 ) THIS is a reference made by the learned Sessions Judge, Medak recommending that the order of maintenance passed by the trial Court in favour of the wife at the rate of Rs. 20 per month should be set aside and in view of a decision of the erstwhile Hyderabad High Court in Wahab Ali v. Qambo Bi, A. I. R. 1951 Hyd 117, holding that if the previous divorce is not established, the divorce will operate from the time which is mentioned in the written statement, the husband should be directed to pay maintenance for the period of iddat i. e. about four months. In this case it appears to me that the husband (petitioner) in his counter had alleged that as he had divorced his wife two years prior to the petition for maintenance, no question of maintenance arises but he could not establish the fact that he had pronounced divorce two years prior to the petition. Therefore the plea of the husband was rejected by the trial court and as a result the order of maintenance was passed. In my view, with due respect to the learned Judge who decided the case mentioned above, the position of law has not been correctly laid down. Under Muslim Law, there are different modes of talak :- (1) Talak Ahsan



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top