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

2019 Supreme(Kar) 199

B.A.PATIL
Srinivas – Appellant
Versus
Manjulamma – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G. Papi Reddy, Adv., N. Vagessh, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

B.A. Patil, J.

The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner-husband assailing the judgment passed by the Fast Tack Court VIII, Bengaluru in criminal Appeal No. 45/2013 dated 22.04.2014 confirming the order passed by the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, Traffic Court V, Bengaluru in Crl. Misc. No. 25/2011 dated 13.12.2012.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner husband and the learned counsel for the respondent wife.

3. Before going to consider the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, for the purpose of brevity, I want to put forth the facts of the case as contended by the parties before the Courts below.

4. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner husband and respondent wife are legally wedded and their marriage was solemnized on 16.03.1981. Out of the wed lock the respondent - wife gave birth to a female child and now, that child has also been given in marriage. It is the case of the respondent - wife that the petitioner - husband in lieu of settlement, had given a house property and he also used to pay maintenance of Rs. 1,000/- per month and subsequently the same was enhanced up to Rs. 5,000/- per month. The responde




























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