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

2008 Supreme(Ker) 84

A.K.BASHEER
Seenath – Appellant
Versus
Iqbal – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:For the Petitioners:V.M. Krishnakumar, Advocate. For the Respondents:C. Khalid, Advocate.

Judgment :

Petitioner is a divorced Muslim woman. She impugns the order passed by the trial court rejecting her application under Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 (for short, 'the Act') claiming a total sum of Rs.1,00,000/- from her former husband, towards fair and reasonable provision and maintenance and other statutory dues. The learned Magistrate held that the petitioner was not entitled to get any amount from her former husband, since she had already received whatever was due under Ext.D1 agreement.

2. Is the above view legally valid and sustainable?

3. It is not in dispute that the respondent/husband had divorced the petitioner unilaterally, by pronouncing talaq through his communication dated February 5, 1996, which was produced and marked as Ext.P1 in the case. Petitioner approached the Court below claiming that she was entitled to get fair and reasonable provision and maintenance and other customary dues as provided under Section 3 of the Act, being a divorced woman as defined under the Act. Her contention was that her former husband had not paid any amount towards the above statutory dues though he had been earning a monthly income o






















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