The order reads like this in this Dismissed for Default DVC.
Conditions not complied, though petitioner availing sufficient time not proceed with case. Hence DVC is dismissed for default.
A new story in this DVC. Read it.
A withdrawn DVC here.
Dismissed DVC for default. Batta not paid. Haha
A compromise order from a Lok Adalat.
[related_posts_by_tax title=”5 Recently Updated Posts, Similar or Related To Above Post” orderby=”post_modified” posts_per_page=”5″ show_date=”true”]
Another ex parte order in DV case.
A key observation by Magistrate
The Petitioner has also sought for compensation Rs.10,00,000/- from the 1st Respondent. But she did not specify as to on what counts she had sought such compensation. In these circumstances, the mere averment in the Petition is not sufficient to grant compensation to the Petitioner, since the tie between the Petitioner/ Aggrieved Person is sacred the marital tie and it cannot be equated with any business relation wherein the damages or compensation will be paid for breach.
[related_posts_by_tax title=”5 Recently Updated Posts, Similar or Related To Above Post” orderby=”post_modified” posts_per_page=”5″ show_date=”true”]
In this order from Chittor Magistrate court, all 6 respondents were set ex-parte. Just by the deposition/evidence of the knife, the magistrate believed that P.W.1 was subjected to domestic violence by demanding additional dowry.
Nice…
[related_posts_by_tax title=”5 Recently Updated Posts, Similar or Related To Above Post” orderby=”post_modified” posts_per_page=”5″ show_date=”true”]
This time it is a practicing advocate who came begging for alms from her husband, not even caring to prove that she is destitute and unable to maintain herself.
See the timelines for disposal of a 125 CrPC case.
The application for maintenance, filed in 2003, was finally disposed of on 28th January, 2015 by Family Court. Then it moved onto Supreme Court and got disposed off on 25th September, 2018.
[related_posts_by_tax title=”5 Recently Updated Posts, Similar or Related To Above Post” orderby=”post_modified” posts_per_page=”5″ show_date=”true”]
In this order from CIC, the Commission directed the respondent authority (PIO, EPFO, Chennai) to provide the employment status relating to knife to the appellant.
[related_posts_by_tax title=”5 Recently Updated Posts, Similar or Related To Above Post” orderby=”post_modified” posts_per_page=”5″ show_date=”true”]
Bad Behavior has blocked 2586 access attempts in the last 7 days.
