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

2002 Supreme(Cal) 406

Subhro Kamal Mukherjee
Ranu Roy – Appellant
Versus
Pradip Kumar Roy – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Pinaki Ranjan Mitra, Juna Das for the petitioner
Bidyut Kumar Banerjee, Shila Sarkar, Arnab Ray for the opposite party

Judgment

Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, J.

This is a revisional application against an order dated August 7, 2001 passed by Mr. R.K. Dutta Chowdhury, learned Additional District Judge, Fifth Court at Barasat, District: 24 Parganas (North) in Matrimonial Suit No. 39 of 2001 whereby the prayer of the wife/defendant for stay of the suit filed by the husband was rejected accepting the view that order passed under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 could be executed like money decrees as prescribed under Rule 30 of Order 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

2. Matrimonial Suit No.196 of 1996 was instituted by the husband, inter alia, on the ground of cruelty in the court of the learned District Judge at Barasat, District: 24 Parganas (North), which has been eventually transferred to the court of the learned Additional District Judge, Fifth Court at Barasat, District: 24 Parganas (North) and has since been renumbered as Matrimonial Suit No. 39 of 2001 in the said court.

3. In the said suit the wife filed an application under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on November 30, 1994 claiming maintenance pendente lite at the rate of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand) only per month and fo
























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