PAREED PILLAY
Haroon – Appellant
Versus
Sainabha – Respondent
First respondent filed M.C. 27 of 1980 before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Ambalapuzha claiming maintenance for her and her son (second respondent). Maintenance was granted and the petitioner was directed to pay monthly allowance of Rs. 100/- each to respondents 1 and 2. Contention of the petitioner is that on 9-11-1982 the matter was settled out of Court and the first respondent executed an agreement in favour of the petitioner and a lump sum of Rs. 2,500/-was received by her from him. It is submitted that in view of the agreement whereby all the disputes regarding maintenance were permanently settled and all legal proceedings closed, first respondent cannot make any claim for maintenance from the petitioner. Such a contention was raised when respondents 1 and 2 filed application under S.128 Cr.P.C. to execute the order of maintenance granted by the Court.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the very fact that Cr1.M.P. 2769 of 1991 was filed under S.128 Cr.P.C. on 29-6-1991 i.e. approximately 9 years after the date of agreement is by itself sufficient to hold that the first respondent had voluntarily relinquished all her rights in view of
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.