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

1958 Supreme(Mad) 12

P.RAJAGOPALAN, GANAPATIA PILLAI
T. N. Kuriakose – Appellant
Versus
Mrs. Leelie Kuriakose – Respondent


Advocates:
G. Vasanta Pai and D. Padmanabha Pai, for Appellant.
E. Antony Lobo, for Respondent.

Rajagopalan, O.C.J.- Despite the range of arguments before us and the persistence and bitterness with which these interlocutory proceedings appear to have been fought out, the only modification, which, in our opinion, is called for in the order of Balakrishna Iyer, J., is the reduction of the quantum of alimony pendente lite from Rs. 180 a month which he awarded to Rs. 150 a month to be effective from the date of his order. The appeal will stand dismissed in other respects but without costs.

There was no acceptable evidence that the appellant’s wife had any property which yielded any income. The learned Judge found that she had some jewellery which was certainly not in excess of what a young lady of her status in life could be expected to possess for her personal use, some articles of furniture and household utensils, none of which she could be reasonably expected to sell either to maintain herself during the pendency of the suit or to finance the litigation, to which she had unfortunately committed herself. It is true there was a necklace of hers worth about Rs. 5,000 which was sold by her father ; the learned Judge took that factor into account, but as he pointed out it was not re





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