Back
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J
CHINNAN KRISHORE KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition for maintaining family obligations under law. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. discussion of procedural violations in granting maintenance. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. maintenance must reflect a balanced assessment of needs and obligations. (Para 8 , 39) |
| 4. underlying principles of maintenance as a right reflecting social justice. (Para 31 , 32) |
| 5. final decision validating the family court's order. (Para 42 , 43) |
ORDER:
Criminal Revision Case has been preferred under Sections 397 and 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C.,’) feeling aggrieved by the order dated 09.03.2018 passed in F.C.O.P.No.1008/2018 on the file of the learned IV Additional District Judge-cum-Judge, Principal Family Court, Vijayawada.
2. Sri M.Venu Gopal, learned Counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the impugned order of the learned Court below suffers from perversity and material irregularity, being contrary to the evidence on record and probabilities of the case. It is urged that the learned Family Court erred in granting maintenance without proper appreciation of the chief affidavit filed under Order XVIII Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity ‘the C.P.C.,’) whi
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
