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

1976 Supreme(Mad) 654

RAMANUJAM
Leelavathy – Appellant
Versus
Sundar Athmaseelan – Respondent


Advocates:
S. Nainar Sundaram, for Appellant; M. Veluswami, for Respondent.

Judgement

ORDER: - This appeal is directed against the order of the lower court refusing to award interim maintenance claimed by the appellant at the rate of Rs. 200 per month.

2. The appellant and the respondent were married on 11-7-1973. The respondent herein filed a suit O. S. No. 1 of 1975 seeking divorce under S. 10 of the Indian Divorce Act 1869, on 9-4-1975, on the ground that the appellant had committed adultery with the second defendant in the suit. The appellant resisted the said suit on the ground that she had not committed adultery with the second defendant or any one else, but on the other hand, the plaintiff had driven her out and deserted her 2 or 3 months after the marriage. After filing the written statement in the said suit, the appellant filed a petition under S. 36 of the Indian Divorce Act, for directing the plaintiff-husband to pay her alimony at Rs. 200 per month and also the cost of defence in the suit.

3. In the said petition she has alleged that as she had been deserted by her husband (plaintiff), that she is living with her elder brother in Japan, that she owns no property, and that, therefore, she has to be paid alimony to maintain herself during the penden





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