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

1987 Supreme(Cal) 142

A.M.BHATTACHARJEE, AJIT KUMAR NAYAK
GITA CHATTERJEE – Appellant
Versus
PROBHAT KUMAR CHATTERJEE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ASIT KUMAR BHATTACHARJI, BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA, INDRAJIT MONDAL

A. M. BHATTACHARJEE, J.

( 1 ) -THE petitioner-wife, who is the respondent in this appeal, has filed this application under Mecum 44, Hindu Marriage Act for maintenance pendente lite and expenses of the appeal against the husband who is the appellant in this appeal. in the Court below, the husband did not contest the wife's application for pendente Lite maintenance and on consent of the parties, the Court passed an order directing the husband to pay a sum of Rs. 850 per month as maintenance during the trial. Before us, however, the present application by the wife respondent for pendente lite maintenance during the period of this appeal and for expenses of this appeal has been very seriously. opposed by the husband-appellant on the ground that he has now come to learn that the wife owns two pieces of valuable lands in Calcutta and as such she can not be regarded to be one who "has no independent income sufficient for her support" within the meaning of Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act and is, therefore, not entitled to invoke that Section.

( 2 ) THE wife has not denied that she owns those two plots of lands but has averred in her affidavit that those two plots of vacant land mea







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