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

2011 Supreme(Mad) 1729

G.M.AKBAR ALI
Sambunayagi – Appellant
Versus
S. K. Manickam – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:B. Ezhilarasan, Advocate. For the Respondent: ------.

Judgment :-

1. By consent of both sides, the matter has been taken up for final hearing. The petition has been filed seeking a direction to the Family Court, Salem to take on file the petition in C.M.P.Sr.No.2044 of 2010 in M.C.No.3 of 2004.

2. Petitioner is the wife who filed M.C.No.3/2004 against the respondent husband claiming maintenance before the Family Court, Salem. The Family Court passed an order directing the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.2000/- to petitioners 2 and 3 by order dated 18.8.2005. Since the respondent failed to pay, the petitioner filed CMP 193 of 2005 and as the respondent paid a sum of Rs.96,000/ - as arrears, the said petition was not pressed. The respondent is liable to pay maintenance from 22.11.2005 to 22.11.2007. The petitioner filed C.M.P.No.50 of 2007 and it is pending. For the period 22.11.2008 to 22.11.2009 the respondent has to pay a sum of Rs.48,000/-. Therefore, for the said period of 12 months, the petitioner filed a petition before the Court and the learned family Judge returned the petition stating that it is filed beyond limitation period prescribed under Sec.125(3) Cr.P.C.

3. The petitioner re-submitted the petition citing a judgment of this








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