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

1964 Supreme(Guj) 45

V.B.RAJU
DAHYALAL AMATHALAL BHAGAT – Appellant
Versus
BAI MADHUKANTA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: A.D.DESAI, D.K.PANDYA, MUKESH R.PATEL

V. B. RAJU, J.

( 1 ) AN order for maintenance was passed against the Petitioner. Subsequently he obtained a decree for judicial separation against the wife. On this ground he made an application to the learned Magistrate to cancel the maintenance order. The learned Magistrate refused to cancel or vary the maintenance order and he rejected the application of the petitioner.

( 2 ) UNDER section 488 (4) Criminal Procedure Code no wife shall be entitled to receive an allowance from her husband if she is living in adultery or if without any sufficient reason she refuses to live with her husband or if they are living separately by mutual consent. It is therefore clear that if without any sufficient reason the wife refused to live with her husband she is not entitled to receive maintenance Sub-sec. (2) of sec. 489 Cr. P. C. reads as follows :- where it appears to the Magistrate that in consequence of any decision of a competent civil Court any order made under section 488 should be cancelled or varied he shall cancel the order or as the case may be vary the same accordingly. It is therefore clear that the Legislature has given more importance to the decision of a civil Court on points such







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