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

2014 Supreme(Online)(KER) 29725

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
K.HARILAL, J
RAMANKUTTY – Appellant
Versus
BINDHU – Respondent


Advocates:
ADV. SRI.P.JAYARAM, ADV. DR.ABRAHAM P. MEACHINKARA

O R D E R

The revision petitioner is the respondent in M.C.No.402/2011 on the files of the Family Court, Palakkad. He is the husband of the 1st respondent as well as the father of the 2nd respondent, herein. The above M.C. was filed under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking maintenance allowance from the revision petitioner. According to the 1st respondent, she is the legally wedded wife of the revision petitioner and the 2nd respondent is the child born in that wed- lock. At the time of marriage, her parents gave 25 sovereigns of gold ornaments and `2 lakhs as gift. But, after the birth of the 2nd respondent, the revision petitioner and his family members began to harass the 1st respondent for more dowry and money. The revision petitioner has been neglecting to pay maintenance allowance to the respondents from the year 2010 onwards. On 16.1.2010, the 1st respondent was brutally assaulted by the revision petitioner and his family members and, thereafter, they kicked out her from her matrimonial home. Thereupon, on her complaint, the Ottapalam police registered Crime No.74/2010 against the revision petitioner and others. The 1st respondent has no job or income. Sh

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