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

1975 Supreme(Guj) 136

J.M.SHETH
Vanitaben Bhaishanker Pandya – Appellant
Versus
Jayantilal Purshottam Upadhayay – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Suresh M. Shah, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

J.M. SHETH, J.

1. This revision petition is filed by the petitioner-wife against the opponent-husband against the order passed by the learned District Judge, Rajkot, dated 1-4-1975, below Ext. 19 in Civil Appeal No. 55 of 1973, refusing to stay the appeal filed by the present petitioner against the opponent-husband against the decree passed by the trial Court granting divorce till the opponent complies with the order passed by the Court in application, Ext. 5, filed by the wife under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (which will be hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), claiming interim alimony and costs of the application. The court passed the said order on 27-9-1973, ordering the opponent-husband to pay to the wife Rs. 20/- per month from 27-6-1973 and to pay a further sum of Rs. 150/- as costs for the prosecution of the aforesaid appeal. It appears that the husband did not comply with that order and did not deposit any amount ordered by the Court. Therefore, the wife filed the aforesaid application, Ex. 19, requesting the Court to pass an order that the husband should immediately pay up to her the amount as ordered by the Court and if he fails to do so, the pro

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