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

1997 Supreme(Mad) 249

S.S.SUBRAMANI
Kannamma – Appellant
Versus
Y. Subramaniam – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:T. Sundarrajan, Advocate.
For the Respondent:G. Muniratnam, Advocate.

Judgment :-

1. Respondent in H.M.O.P. No. 18 of 1991, on the file of Subordinate Judges Court. Poonamallee, is the revision petitioner.

2. Petitioner in the said H.M.O.P. (husband) filed the same for divorce on the ground that the wife deserted him without any reasonable cause. On her entering appearance, she filed an application under S. 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act for getting interim alimony and litigation expenses for herself and her children. The court awarded a sum of Rs. 600/- per month towards the maintenance of the wife and a sum of Rs. 300/- per month for each child towards their maintenance from the date of riling of the petition, i.e., 14.2.1991, and a sum of Rs. 1,000/- towards litigation expenses. That order was passed on 8.11.1995.


3. Against that order, a Revision was taken to this Court in C.R.P. No. 1063 of 1996. Jagadeesan, J. dismissed the same even at the stage of admission, on the ground that he did not find any illegality in the order. But, while disposing of the Revision, the learned judge gave a direction to the court below to dispose of the main H.M.O.P. No. 18 of 1991 within three months from the date of receipt of copy of that order and report compliance






























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