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

2014 Supreme(Chh) 64

P.SAM KOSHY
SUKANYA – Appellant
Versus
BALAK RAM – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate appeared:
Shri F.S. Khare, Advocate, for the Applicant.
Shri Atul Pandey, Advocate, for the Non-applicant.

ORDER

1. By way of the instant criminal revision, the applicant has challenged the order dated 10.03.2011 passed by the Family Court, Bilaspur in Misc. Criminal Case No. 235/2007.

2. Facts leading to the instant criminal revision, in brief, are that the applicant had filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure along with an application under Section 26 r/w Section 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act seeking maintenance of Rs.5,000 per month or a lump sum of Rs.7,00,000 as full and final settlement from the non-applicant.

3. The case of the applicant before the Court below was that initially the applicant had married to one Ramkripal and after mutual separation (Chor-Chhutti) from her husband Ramkripal as per the customary practice prevailed in the society, she got married to the non-applicant by adopting the system of Churi marriage. Further case of the applicant was that since 2007 the non-applicant started harassing and ill treating her on various occasions and even tried to kill her which forced her to leave the house of non-applicant. On account of continuous torture and harassment given by the non-applicant, the applicant was left












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