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

1991 Supreme(Raj) 2

K.BHATNAGAR, Y.R.MEENA
RAM CHANDRA – Appellant
Versus
TUTSI BAI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
H.S.S.Kharaliya, HAMEER SINGH, RAJENDRA CHAUDHARY

Judgment


K. BHATNAGAR, J.

( 1 ) ON the application of Smt. Tulsi Devi respondent under Sec. 125, Cr. P. C. , claiming maintenance for herself, her son Jaisingh and daughter Sunita, the Family Court. Jodhpur, by order dated 19-6-89, allowed the application and ordered for payment of Rs. 200/- per month to Smt. Tulsi Devi, Rs. 150/- per month to her daughter Sunita and the same amount to her son Jaisingh from the date of the application, i. e. 2-6-86, by the appellant Ramchandra. The appellant has not made payment to Smt. Tulsi Devi as per order of the Court therefore, Smt. Tulsi Devi filed an application under Sec. 125 (3), Cr. P. C. on 24-5-1990 in the Family Court, Jodhpur. The learned Judge, on the same date, passed an order for issuance of warrant of attachment for the sum of Rs. 21,900/- against the appellant Ramchandra. Feeling aggrieved with the order, the appellant Ram Chandra preferred this appeal.

( 2 ) THE grievance of the appellant is that under the provision of Sec. 125 (3), Cr. P. C. , the Court should first issue a notice to the person against whom the order of payment is so made to show cause as to why he is not making the payment and after enquiry, warrant of attach



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