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

2023 Supreme(P&H) 1882

TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA
Kamaljit Singh – Appellant
Versus
Nachhatar Kaur @ Sikandar Kaur – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Ripudaman Singh for Mr. Sanjeev Gupta.

Table of Content
1. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)

JUDGMENT :

(Tribhuvan Dahiya, J.)

This petition has been filed against the order dated 15.10.2018 (Annexure P7) vide which the respondent-wife was directed to file a list of property belonging to the petitioner-husband, while deciding the execution application dated 26.09.2017 (Annexure P3) filed by her.

2. As per facts apparent on record, the amount of maintenance of Rs.2,000/- per month was granted to the respondent-wife by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, under section 12 of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short `Domestic Violence Act'). It was enhanced to Rs.3,000/- per month by the Additional Sessions Judge, S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali, while allowing her revision petition, vide order dated 13.11.2014 (Annexure P2). Since the maintenance was not being paid, the respondent-wife filed an execution application for attachment and sale of property belonging to the petitioner-husband or, in the alternative, to send him behind bars for violating the orders of maintenance. The petitioner filed an application, dated 23.04.2018, for dismissing the execution application, which was decided by the Court, vid

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