Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KAINTHLA
Vineet Sood – Appellant
Versus
Poonam Sood – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Rakesh Kainthla, J.)
The present petition is directed against the order dated 16.08.2019 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala H.P. (learned Revisional Court) vide which the order dated 18.12.2017, passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Palampur, District Kangra, H.P. (learned Trial Court) was upheld. (The parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the respondents/applicants filed an application before learned Trial Court for seeking maintenance. Learned Trial Court issued notices in an ordinary manner and through registered A.D. cover. The notices were not returned, hence, Dasti notice was be issued. Applicant No. 1 filed an affidavit on 20.07.2017 that the respondent had refused to accept the service of notice. A copy of the notice containing an endorsement of the process server was also filed. Hence, the Court vide order dated 05.08.2017 held that the respondent knew the date of the hearing but he had failed to appear before the Court. Hence, the respondent was proceeded against
The court upheld the ex-parte maintenance order, affirming that proper service was established and the Magistrate's discretion in service methods is valid under the Criminal Procedure Code.
A magistrate cannot award maintenance to a major married daughter under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Revision under Section 397(1) Cr.P.C. read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. not maintainable against the revisionary order of the Sessions Judge - No grounds for exercise of inherent power by this Court unde....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that an order of maintenance affects the right of a person drastically and substantially, hence, it cannot be treated as an interlocutory order and....
Domestic violence - Maintenance - Court shall not further investigate or adjudicate into amount of maintenance awarded as the same has again been considered at length by the lower Courts by examining....
The court emphasized the procedural propriety requiring litigants to first approach subordinate courts before the High Court unless exceptional circumstances justify bypassing this route.
The High Court retains inherent powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to prevent miscarriages of justice, even when revisional powers are restricted by Section 397(3).
High Courts can exercise inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to prevent injustice, even if alternate remedies are available.
Magistrate's rejection of Section 156(3) CrPC application is final order, revisable under Section 397 CrPC before Sessions Court; writ under Article 226 not entertained due to efficacious alternate r....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
