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

1989 Supreme(Ori) 106

K.P.MOHAPATRA
SUREKHA MRUDANGIA – Appellant
Versus
RAMAHARI MRUDANGIA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.L.N.SWAMY, B.P.Tripathi, B.V.BALARAM DAS

K. P. MOHAPATRA, J.


( 1 ) THE interesting point for consideration is whether future salary of a husband can be attached for recovery of arrears of maintenance by the wife in accordance with the procedure laid down in S. 125 (3) read with S. 421 (1) (a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('code' for short ).

( 2 ) FACTS are simple and undisputed, the petitioner wife obtained an order of maintenance against the opposite party-husband under S. 125 of the Code at the rate of Rs. 125/- per month. She filed a petition (registered as Misc. Case No. 87 of 1985) for attachment of the salary of the opposite party. The petition was allowed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Berhampur and a writ attaching a sum of Rs. 200/- from the salary of the opposite party per month was issue for execution by the Tahasildar, Berhampur under whom the opposite party was serving as a Mohorir. In the meanwhile, the opposite party filed Title Suit No. 77 of 1988 before the Subordinate Judge, Berhampur, the facts of which are unknown, but probably it is a matrimonial case between the parties and in view of pendency of the suit, he prayed for withdrawal of the writ of attachment. The learned Sub-





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