Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MARAS
Shephard, Handley
Ramayee
Versus
Unknown
Decided On : 20 August, 1890
Maintenance - Rate of maintenance and change in circumstances - Interpretation of Section 489
Fact of the Case:
The court considered the rate of maintenance and the possibility of altering it under Section 489 based on changes in circumstances.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the rate of maintenance can be varied over time as the circumstances change, including the child growing older, and that the order directing a prospective increase of the rate should be set aside.
Issues: Interpretation of Section 489, consideration of changes in circumstances for varying maintenance rate
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted Section 489 to allow for variation in the rate of maintenance based on changes in circumstances, including the child growing older.
Final Decision: The court modified the order by setting aside the part directing a prospective increase of the maintenance rate.
1. We think that the ruling in Upendra Nath Dhal v. Sondamini Dasi I.L.R., 12 Cal., 535 is right, and that the rate of maintenance must be fixed, subject only to any possible alteration under the provisions of Section 489. With regard to that section, we think that the fact that the child has grown older would no less constitute "a change in the circumstances of the person receiving the allowance," than would the death of the child or the birth of another, and therefore the rate cam be varied from time to time on application being made as the child gets older. We think the order ought to be modified by setting aside that part of it which directs a prospective increase of the rate.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
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
