Mahadevi I Todale Vs Frankfinn Aviation Services Pvt Ltd & Ors on 10 July, 2017
The Index for Defamation Judgments is here.
Mahadevi I Todale Vs Frankfinn Aviation Services Pvt Ltd & Ors on 10 July, 2017
The Index for Defamation Judgments is here.
Shri Justice Shiv Narayan Dhingra has delivered this wonderful judgment, clearly affirming that as per settled principles of law, if a FIR quash was requested which was filed at a wrong jurisdiction, the duty of the police SHO is to transfer it to the police station where the correct jurisdiction holds.
Sonu and others Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and another on 10 October, 2007Reproduced in accordance with Section 52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, lobis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court and District Court Websites such as ecourts.gov.in
This Maintenance order, under section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, is modified ‘from the date of order’ to ‘from date of application’ by Karnataka High Court, thereby enormously enhancing the overall interim maintenance to be paid by husband.
XXX Vs Amitabh Sinha on 27 Jul 2017Note: Name (and Address) of the Petitioner redacted upon her request email dt: 05 Jul 2023
227. Power of superintendence over all courts by the High Court
(2) Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing provisions, the High Court may
This is a verdict from Delhi High Court dismissing petition of the wife that is filed against the Trial court order to pay maintenance to Husband along with litigation expenses and a car for his usage !!
One should appreciate the detailed dissection made by the Hon’ble Court, of the financial information made available by parties in arriving at the conclusion.
Rani Sethi vs Sunil Sethi on 31 March, 2011The purpose of section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act is to provide support to a spouse who has no independent source of income and is incapable of maintaining himself/herself. It is trite law that the term “support” is not to be construed in a narrow manner so as to mean bare subsistence. It means that the other spouse, who has no independent source of income, is provided with such maintenance so as to live in a similar status as was enjoyed by them in their matrimonial home. It is the purpose of section 24 that the wife or the husband who has no sufficient source of income for her or his support or for the expenses of the proceedings must be provided with such reasonable sum that strikes equity between the spouses.
The Supreme Court Judgment of Jasbir Kaur Sehgal (Smt.) v. District Judge, Dehradun & Others is available here.
The Delhi High Court judgment of Bharat Hegde v. Saroj Hegde is available here that talks about the 11 factors to be considered an application under section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act.
[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 1885 access attempts in the last 7 days.