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

1963 Supreme(MP) 3

S.B.SEN
Deviden Chenaji – Appellant
Versus
Mankibai Devideen – Respondent


JUDGMENT :

( 1. ) FOR disposing of this reference it is necessary to give out the facts which are not disputed.

( 2. ) AN application was made by Nankibai w/o. Devidelen under Section 488, Criminal P. C. An order for maintenance was passed some time in 1953 (31. 7. 53) for payment of Rs. 14 per month to her. On the basis of this order payments were made by the husband for some months but he soon made some defaults. So an application was made by Nankibai on 26. 7. 59 for recovery of arrears due then. This application was resisted by the husband on various grounds including his offer to maintain his wife on condition of her living with him and also his inability to pay the maintenance amount. The matter dragged on for a long time and ultimately this application was decided against the husband on 25. 2. 59. In the said order recovery for the seven months which was due on the date of the application was passed. A fresh application was moved on 11. 6. 59 but the same was dismissed for default on 21. 7. 59. Nankibai however made further application on 22. 8. 59 for recovery of the arrears of maintenance till then and also granting maintenance allowance pendent lite. This application was gr









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