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

2015 Supreme(Chh) 159

SANJAY K.AGRAWAL
Rupesh – Appellant
Versus
Siddhi Patel – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For The Appellant :Pradeep Saksena, Advocate

ORDER :

Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.

1. Impugning the legality, validity and correctness of the order dated 16-4-2015 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Raigarh in Criminal MJC No. F-41/2014, the petitioner/husband has filed this revision under Sub-section (4) of Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (for short 'the Act of 1984') by which his application under Section 13 of the Act of 1984 has been rejected by the said Court.

2. Imperative facts necessary for the disposal of this revision are as under:--

"(2.1) In an application for enhancement of the amount of maintenance allowance by the respondent herein, the Family Court permitted the respondent herein to take the assistance of legal expert as amicus curiae leading to filing of application under Section 13 of the Act of 1984 by the petitioner herein stating inter alia that the petitioner be permitted to take the assistance of legal expert as amicus curiae, as he has no legal knowledge to conduct the proceeding. The Family Court by its impugned order rejected the application holding inter alia that examination and cross-examination of the respondent has already been concluded and, therefore, the application is substance-less. Against t

























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