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

2004 Supreme(Mad) 950

M.THANIKACHALAM
Bommi & Anothers – Appellant
Versus
Munirathinam – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:For The Petitioners:V. Raghavachari, Advocate. For The Respondent:P. Valliappan, Advocate.

Judgment :-

The plaintiffs in O.S.No.202/2001 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Arni are the revision petitioners.

2. The revision petitioners as plaintiffs have filed the suit against the respondent herein, showing him as defendant, for maintenance. The first plaintiff claims that she is the legally wedded wife of the defendant and their marriage has been solemnised, according to the Hindu custom and rites, in the presence of the elders, on 17.10.1985. It is the further case of the revision petitioners, that the second plaintiff, by name Sonia (minor) is the child born to the first plaintiff and the defendant, due to their joint living as husband and wife, in pursuance of the above said marriage.

3. The plaintiffs and defendant are not living jointly. The plaintiffs are the residents of Ambedkar Nagar, Arni Town, Thiruvannamalai District. The defendant is living at Arakonam Railway Quarters, since it appears he is employed in the Railways. The plaintiffs/revision petitioners accusing the respondent/defendant, as if he had deserted the wife and child about 12 years ago, failed to provide maintenance, despite having means, whereas they have no means of their own, fo




































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