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

DELHI HIGH COURT
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
Geeta @ Reeta Mishra – Appellant
Versus
Ajay Mishra – Respondent


Table of Content
1. factual background of domestic violence case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. arguments regarding maintenance inadequacy. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
3. court's analysis on maintenance calculation. (Para 9 , 10)
4. final order modifying maintenance amount. (Para 11)

JUDGMENT

1. This revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, (Cr.P.C.) is directed against impugned judgment dated 31.07.2019, passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Tis Hazari (West) Courts in CA No.268/2018 whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner under Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (DV Act, 2005) against the order dated 18.10.2018, passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate-02, West, Delhi, rejecting application of the petitioner under Section 12 of the DV Act, 2005, has been allowed in part.

2. A detailed narration of the facts is not necessary for the reason that the petitioner confines her submissions only to the extent of inadequacy of the maintenance awarded in her favour by the court below. However, some of the facts relevant for adjudication of the issue raised would be referred as and when they are require

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