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

1982 Supreme(Guj) 229

V.V.BEDARKAR
MANIBEN – Appellant
Versus
MANIBHAI MOHANGIR GOSWAMI – Respondent


JUDGEMENT

1. Petitioner Maniben alias Madhuben has come to this Court with a grievance that the learned Ses-sions Judge, Baroda, has wrongly re-duced the amount of maintenance to be paid to her from Rs. 5,100/- as ordered by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Baroda, to Rs. 1,800/-. This was done by the learned Sessions Judge on consideration that the application for recovery of amount of maintenance under Section 125(3) of the Criminal P.C. 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') permits recovery of the amount of arrears of maintenance for one year only. This decision was given on the strength of first proviso to sub-section (3) of Section 125 of the Code. Sub-section (3) of Section 125 of the Code reads as under:

"125 (3). If any person so ordered fails without sufficient cause to comply with the order, any such Magistrate may, for every breach of the order, issue a war-rant for levying the amount due in the manner provided for levying fines, and may sentence such person for the whole or any part of each month's allowance remaining unpaid after the execution of the warrant, to imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month or until payment if sooner made:

Prov












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