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

2022 Supreme(Tri) 47

T. AMARNATH GOUD
Gunamani Chakma – Appellant
Versus
Papita Debbarma – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
S. Lodh and K. Roy, Advocates, for the Appellant; S. Debnath, Addl. P.P, for the Respondents

JUDGMENT

T. Amarnath Goud, J. - This instant criminal revision petition has been filed under Section 19(4) of the FAMILY COURTS ACT , 1984, against the impugned order dated 18.01.2022, passed in Misc. (Int.)210 of 2021, whereby the learned Judge, Family Court, Agartala, West Tripura directed the petitioner to pay interim maintenance allowance amounting to Rs. 12,000/- per month to the respondent No. 1 and Rs. 8,000/- per month to the respondent no. 2

2. The facts of the case in brief, which may be relevant for the present purpose and manifest on the record are that the marriage between the petitioner and respondent No. 1 was solemnized as per Buddhist rites and custom on 07.03.2013. On 01.11.2014, respondent No. 1 gave birth to a male child, namely, Master Prince Chakma, who is impleaded as respondent No. 2. They started to live together in Jirania in a rented house of Renu Debbarma, in Santi Bazar area. After that, the petitioner-husband started to torture respondent No. 1 both mentally and physically for a demand of Rs. 50,000/-. Thereafter, from September 2020, the petitioner-husband started to reside at camp barak and did not provide any maintenance to the petitioner and rent of

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