Back
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Alok Mahra, J
Jogendra – Appellant
Versus
Doli Katariya – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. establishing the factual matrix and procedural history of the maintenance application. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. parties' arguments regarding income assessment and maintenance liabilities. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. validation of income-based maintenance orders supported by evidentiary record. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. limited scope of criminal revision against interim maintenance orders. (Para 10 , 11) |
Mr. Rohit Kumar, learned counsel, holding brief of Mr. I.D. Paliwal, learned counsel for the revisionist.
2. Mr. N.S. Kanyal, learned A.G.A for the State.
3. Mr. Sachin Kumar, learned counsel for the complainant/respondent no. 2.
4. The present criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist against the judgments and orders dated 15.03.2021 and 25.10.2021 passed by Judge, Family Court, Haridwar in Criminal Case No. 209 of 2016, Doli @ Praveen Katariya Vs. Jogendra, whereby, the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. has been allowed and interim maintenance of Rs.8000/- per month has been awarded to respondent no. 2 from the date of filing of the application i.e. 14.09.2016.
5. Brief facts of the case are that respondent no. 2 initially filed an application under Section 125 C
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
