web analytics

Menu

Skip to content
Shades of Knife
  • Home
  • True Colors of a Vile Wife
  • Need Inspiration?
  • Blog Updates
  • SOK Gallery
  • Vile News Reporter
  • About Me
  • Contact Me

Shades of Knife

True Colors of a Vile Wife

Tag: Maintenance

No Maintenance to Knife Judgments

Posted on May 29, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

Broad grounds on which maintenance is denied to knife

1. Wife who Deserts husband not entitled for maintenance

 

2. Educated and Working Wife (even after marriage) not entitled for maintenance

  • Mamta Jaiswal vs Rajesh Jaiswal on 24 March, 2000
  • Neeraj Aggarwal Vs Veeka Aggarwal on September 19, 2007

 

3. Wife left job and sitting idle after filing cases not entitled for maintenance

 

In some recent judgments of High Courts, it is being held that capable to earn is NOT equated to earning currently. Banking on this aspect only is not helpful and can be suicidal if this is the only argument victim-husband has.

Posted in Assorted Court Judgments or Orders or Notifications | Tagged Catena of Landmark Judgments Referred/Cited to HM Act 24 – Interim Maintenance Granted Maintenance Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 Summary Post | Leave a comment

Sanjay Sudhakar Bhosale Vs Khristina on 8 April, 2008

Posted on May 26, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

Another judgment this time from Bombay High Court, which says no cruelty proved in maintenance case under section 125 CrPC results in no maintenance to Knife.

This sentence in last para is not appreciable though.

However, the payment of maintenance allowance, if any, during the intervening period, is not refundable by her.

Note: This is how the false case filers are encouraged/supported by Judiciary in India.

Sanjay Sudhakar Bhosale Vs Khristina on 8 April, 2008

 

Posted in High Court of Bombay Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged 1-Judge Bench Decision CrPC 125 - Cruelty Not Proved CrPC 125 - Maintenance Denied Maintenance Sanjay Sudhakar Bhosale Vs Khristina | Leave a comment

Grant of Maintenance under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act

Posted on May 20, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

Listed here are some judgments wherein the judge/magistrates have granted maintenance to knifes.

Andhra Pradesh

  1. Boddu Anjali Vs Boddu Annapoornamma on 17 June, 2015
Posted in Assorted Court Judgments or Orders or Notifications | Tagged Catena of Landmark Judgments Referred/Cited to Maintenance Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 Summary Post | Leave a comment

Boddu Anjali Vs Boddu Annapoornamma on 17 June, 2015

Posted on May 20, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

A very good point available in this judgment from the JMFC. Ongole, for those who are facing Domestic Violence case as well as IPC 498A wherein the allegations are same in both.

When the husband of a knife dies, maintenance of the daughter-in-law falls are the parents-in-law as long as she is alive. There is no requirement of law that a grandfather is under an
obligation to maintain his grand child when the mother of said child is alive.

Boddu Anjali Vs Boddu Annapoornamma on 17 June, 2015

 

Posted in District or Sessions or Magistrate Court Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged Boddu Anjali Maintenance Pay Maintenance to Daughter-in-Law Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 PWDV Act 18 - Protection Order Granted | Leave a comment

Grant of Interim Maintenance under Hindu Marriage Act

Posted on May 12, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

Here are list of interim maintenance judgments from various High Courts

 

Delhi High Court

  1. Bharat Hegde vs Saroj Hegde on 24 April, 2007
  2. Pradeep Kumar Vs. Ratna Sharma on 3 July, 2009
  3. Sujit Kumar Vs Vandana on 08 Aug 2016 [Based on Bharat Hegde above from 2007]

 

Karnataka High Court

  1. Sunita Motwani Vs Amitabh Sinha on 27 July, 2017
Posted in Assorted Court Judgments or Orders or Notifications | Tagged Catena of Landmark Judgments Referred/Cited to HM Act 24 – Interim Maintenance Granted Maintenance Summary Post | Leave a comment

Poongadi And Anr Vs Thangavel on 27 September, 2013

Posted on May 12, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

Hon’ble Apex Court in this judgment re-iterated that the imprisonment for a monthly maintenance payment failure is 1 single month, for each violation.

From Para 6,

6. In another decision of this Court in Shantha v. B.G Shivananjappa 2005 4 SCC 468 it has been held that the liability to pay maintenance under Section 125 CrPC is in the nature of a continuing liability. The nature of the right to receive maintenance and the concomitant liability to pay was also noticed in a decision of this Court in Shahada Khatoon v. Amjad Ali 1999 5 SCC 672. Though in a slightly different context, the remedy to approach the court by means of successive applications under Section 125(3) CrPC highlighting the subsequent defaults in payment of maintenance was acknowledged by this Court in Shahada Khatoon.

From Para 8,

8. In view of the above, we are left in no doubt that the order passed by the High Court needs to be interfered with by us which we accordingly do. The order dated 21-4-2004 of the High Court is set aside and we now issue directions to the respondent to pay the entire arrears of maintenance due to the appellants commencing from the date of filing of the maintenance petition (MC No. 1 of 1993) i.e 4-2-1993 within a period of six months and current maintenance commencing from the month of September 2013 payable on or before 7-10-2013 and thereafter continue to pay the monthly maintenance on or before the 7th of each successive month. If the above order of this Court is not complied with by the respondent, the learned trial court is directed to issue a warrant for the arrest of the respondent and ensure that the same is executed and the respondent taken into custody to suffer imprisonment as provided by Section 125(3) CrPC.

 

Poongadi And Anr vs Thangavel on 27 September, 2013

Citations : [2013 SCR 9 862], [2013 AIR BOMR 6 775], [2013 SLT 8 113], [2013 SCALE 12 186], [2013 CRIMES SC 4 371], [2013 AIR SC 5764], [2014 AIR SC 24], [2013 BOMCR CRI SC 4 794], [2013 CRLJ SC 5006], [2014 SCC CRI 1 361], [2013 SCC 10 618], [2013 RCR CRIMINAL SC 4 504], [2013 RCR CIVIL SC 4 701], [2013 AIOL 65], [12013 SUPREME 7 254], [2013 SCC ONLINE SC 893], [2013 GUJ LH 3 363], [2013 CTC 6 338], [2013 AIC 131 58], [2014 ECRN 1 720], [2014 AD SC 7 511], [2013 ALLCC 83 973], [2014 ALT CRL AP 1 299], [2013 DMC 3 460], [2014 GLR SC 3 2005], [2013 JLJR 4 575], [2014 LW CRL 1 69], [2013 NCC 2 840], [2014 PLJR 1 52], [2014 SCJ 1 797], [2013 AIR SCW 5764]

Other Sources :

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/5626322/

https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5609af2de4b0149711415baa

Posted in Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged 2-Judge (Division) Bench Decision Failure To Pay Maintenance Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes Maintenance Poongadi And Anr Vs Thangavel Reportable Judgement or Order Shahada Khatoon and Ors Vs Amjad Ali and Ors Shantha @ Ushadevi and Anr Vs B.G.Shivananjappa | Leave a comment

Laljee Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar on 16 September, 2011

Posted on May 10, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

This is a wonderful judgment explaining the imprisonment of accused who fails to make the maintenance payments to Knife under Sec 125(3) of CrPC.

Noticing the peculiar situation where virtually the petitioner has been made to serve life sentence and the insensitivity of the Judge in the matter, we called for the lower Court records to examine for ourselves the facts because if what is being said by the Principal Judge, Family Court is to be accepted then the petitioner would virtually be serving a life sentence with no remission possible.

 

What is more scandalous is, as will be shown, petitioner has been kept in prison mechanically and that too for months even without any order of remand by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court.

 

The Code itself provides by Section 421 for warrant for levy of fine….

… A reference to Section 421 and the proviso would show that it clearly prohibits a person to be imprisoned in execution of warrant levying fine which would simply for recovery of the maintenance and, thus, there is no scope for issuance of any distress warrant for detaining a defaulter husband.

 

For the purposes of sentencing, the Code has provision in terms of Sections 29 and 30 thereof but the question remains that can there be a sentence straightway upon default being shown. In our view, no.

 

Unfortunately, in total disregard to the binding precedent, the learned Principal Judge, Family Court proceeded. The result is that the petitioner is being detained in custody ad infinitum which is against the statutory provisions.

 

Again, this is significant inasmuch as the maintenance being a monthly payment, for each month’s default, defaulter can be sentenced for a month’s imprisonment.

 

As seen above, the maintenance is to be fixed on monthly basis. The sentence has, accordingly, been limited to a month maximum for each breach.

 

We, therefore, hold that the detention of the petitioner cannot be justified and is contrary to the scheme as provided under Section 125 (3) of the Code. We have no option accordingly but to direct the immediate release of the petitioner, while quashing the order committing the petitioner to custody and subsequent orders of remand. The writ application is allowed.

 

Laljee Yadav vs The State Of Bihar on 16 September, 2011
Posted in High Court of Patna Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged CrPC 125(3) - No Automatic Arrest on Failure To Pay Maintenance CrPC 421 - Warrant for levy of fine Failure To Pay Maintenance Follow CrPC 421 For Maintenance Recovery Landmark Case Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes Maintenance No Automatic Arrest Order Quashed | Leave a comment

Sirajmohmedkhan Janmohamadkhan Vs Hafizunnisa Yasinkhan and Anr on 14 September, 1981

Posted on May 2, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

This Supreme Court judgment affirmed that Impotency of Husband is a valid ground that causes Physical and Mental cruelty on Knife and I also valid for maintenance under section 125(3).

 

Sirajmohmedkhan Janmohamadkhan vs Hafizunnisa Yasinkhan & Anr on 14 September, 1981
Posted in Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged Impotency Ground Maintenance Sirajmohmedkhan Janmohamadkhan Vs Hafizunnisa Yasinkhan and Anr | Leave a comment

Rani Sethi vs Sunil Sethi on 31 March, 2011

Posted on April 20, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

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.

The 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.

Rani Sethi vs Sunil Sethi on 31 March, 2011

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”]

Posted in High Court of Delhi Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged Article 227 - Power of superintendence over all courts by the High Court HM Act 24 – Interim Maintenance Granted Maintenance Pay Maintenance to Husband Rani Sethi vs Sunil Sethi | Leave a comment

Sangitaben Rasiklal Jaiswal vs Sanjaykumar Ratilal Jaiswal on 9 December, 1999

Posted on April 20, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

Gujarat High Court delivered this Judgment highlighting many key judicial aspects.

Merely because the husband is possessing valuable movable and immovable properties it is hardly of any relevance in the matter for grant of temporary maintenance. It is understandable if the husband is having regular income from the properties then it may be taken into consideration. However, as per the case of the petitioner herself, these are all ancestral properties and at this stage, it is difficult to find out what is the ultimate share of the husband – respondent therein. The petitioner has not given out what regular income per month husband is getting from these properties. The valuation of properties irrespective of the fact whether what is stated is correct or not, is not sufficient to take that what claim has been made for maintenance and other things has to be accepted.

Key point to note is:

To reach to a reasonable sum of maintenance to be awarded to the wife on her application under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act what income regularly per month the husband is having has to be considered. He is in employment and accordingly his salary is taken into consideration and the amount of interim maintenance awarded can not be interfered with.

Exploitation of petitioner by advocate:

The rejoinder affidavit has given shocking facts and really after going through the contents of this affidavit, it touches the conscience of the court that how the lady who has no source of income whatsoever and entitled for free legal aid under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 has been exploited by an advocate.

Final touch:

The petitioner was entitled for free legal aid but she could not get this facility either because of unawareness of her right or that her advocate has not made known her of this right, the innocent husband cannot be saddled with the costs of this revision application. Hence, no order as to costs.

 

Sangitaben Rasiklal Jaiswal vs Sanjaykumar Ratilal Jaiswal on 9 December, 1999

[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”]

Posted in High Court of Gujarat Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged Advocate Antics Availability of Legal Aid HM Act 24 – Interim Maintenance Granted Maintenance | Leave a comment

Post navigation

  • Older posts

Search within entire Content of “Shades of Knife”

My Legal Twitter Timeline

Tweets by @SandeepPamarati

My MRA Twitter Timeline

Tweets by @Shadesofknife

Recent Posts

  • Ram Nath Sao @ Ram Nath Sahu and Ors Vs Gobardhan Sao and Ors on 27 Feb 2002 February 4, 2023
  • Nimesh Dilipbhai Brahmbhatt Vs Hitesh Jayantilal Patel on 02 May 2022 February 4, 2023
  • Indian Oil Corporation Ltd and Ors Vs Subrata Borah Chowlek and Anr on 12 Nov 2010 February 4, 2023
  • State of Maharashtra Vs Dnyaneshwar Laxman Rao Wankhede on 29 Jul 2009 January 26, 2023
  • Sabiya Begum Malka Vs State of U.P. and Ors on 18 May 2016 January 24, 2023

Most Read Posts

  • Do you know that there is time limit of 60 days to dispose of a Domestic Violence case in India under sec 12(5) of PWDV Act? (9,491 views)
  • XXX Vs State of Kerala and Ors on 05 July 2022 (2,847 views)
  • Ratandeep Singh Ahuja Vs Harpreet Kaur on 11 Oct 2022 (911 views)
  • State Bank of India and Anr Vs Ajay Kumar Sood on 16 Aug 2022 (871 views)
  • Abbas Hatimbhai Kagalwala Vs The State of Maharashtra and Anr on 23 Aug 2022 (856 views)
  • Bar Council of India Vs Bonnie Foi Law College and Ors (726 views)
  • Sandeep Pamarati Vs State of AP and Anr on 29 Sep 2022 (Disposal of DVC in 60 days) (706 views)
  • P Parvathi Vs Pathloth Mangamma on 7 Jul 2022 (704 views)
  • Mukesh Singh versus State of Uttar Pradesh on 30 Sep 2022 (622 views)
  • Joginder Singh Vs Rajwinder Kaur on 29 Oct 2022 (576 views)

Tags

Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes (325)Reportable Judgement or Order (321)Landmark Case (312)2-Judge (Division) Bench Decision (261)Work-In-Progress Article (218)Catena of Landmark Judgments Referred/Cited to (212)1-Judge Bench Decision (146)Sandeep Pamarati (88)3-Judge (Full) Bench Decision (79)Article 21 - Protection of life and personal liberty (74)Perjury Under 340 CrPC (53)Issued or Recommended Guidelines or Directions or Protocols to be followed (52)Absurd Or After Thought Or Baseless Or False Or General Or Inherently Improbable Or Improved Or UnSpecific Or Omnibus Or Vague Allegations (51)Reprimands or Setbacks to YCP Govt of Andhra Pradesh (49)Summary Post (46)CrPC 482 - Quash (38)Not Authentic copy hence to be replaced (34)Advocate Antics (34)Rules of the Act/Ordinance/Notification/Circular (33)IPC 498a - Not Made Out (32)

Categories

Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification (631)Bare Acts or State Amendments or Statutes or GOs or Notifications issued by Central or State Governments (297)High Court of Andhra Pradesh Judgment or Order or Notification (159)High Court of Delhi Judgment or Order or Notification (108)High Court of Bombay Judgment or Order or Notification (91)High Court of Karnataka Judgment or Order or Notification (66)General Study Material (55)High Court of Madras Judgment or Order or Notification (53)Assorted Court Judgments or Orders or Notifications (48)Prakasam DV Cases (46)LLB Study Material (45)High Court of Punjab & Haryana Judgment or Order or Notification (45)Judicial Activism (for Public Benefit) (40)High Court of Allahabad Judgment or Order or Notification (39)District or Sessions or Magistrate Court Judgment or Order or Notification (38)High Court of Kerala Judgment or Order or Notification (30)High Court of Gujarat Judgment or Order or Notification (26)High Court of Madhya Pradesh Judgment or Order or Notification (25)High Court of Calcutta Judgment or Order or Notification (18)High Court of Patna Judgment or Order or Notification (17)

Recent Comments

  • ShadesOfKnife on Beena MS Vs Shino G Babu on 04 Feb 2022
  • Vincent on Beena MS Vs Shino G Babu on 04 Feb 2022
  • ShadesOfKnife on Syed Nazim Husain Vs Additional Principal Judge Family Court & Anr on 9 January, 2003
  • Ravi on Syed Nazim Husain Vs Additional Principal Judge Family Court & Anr on 9 January, 2003
  • ShadesOfKnife on Beena MS Vs Shino G Babu on 04 Feb 2022

Archives of SoK

  • February 2023 (3)
  • January 2023 (12)
  • December 2022 (12)
  • November 2022 (8)
  • October 2022 (13)
  • September 2022 (17)
  • August 2022 (10)
  • July 2022 (21)
  • June 2022 (27)
  • May 2022 (23)
  • April 2022 (32)
  • March 2022 (17)
  • February 2022 (6)
  • January 2022 (2)
  • December 2021 (7)
  • November 2021 (7)
  • October 2021 (6)
  • September 2021 (10)
  • August 2021 (31)
  • July 2021 (45)
  • June 2021 (17)
  • May 2021 (17)
  • April 2021 (18)
  • March 2021 (58)
  • February 2021 (14)
  • January 2021 (50)
  • December 2020 (35)
  • November 2020 (68)
  • October 2020 (67)
  • September 2020 (29)
  • August 2020 (41)
  • July 2020 (20)
  • June 2020 (36)
  • May 2020 (40)
  • April 2020 (38)
  • March 2020 (26)
  • February 2020 (43)
  • January 2020 (35)
  • December 2019 (35)
  • November 2019 (4)
  • October 2019 (18)
  • September 2019 (58)
  • August 2019 (33)
  • July 2019 (12)
  • June 2019 (19)
  • May 2019 (5)
  • April 2019 (19)
  • March 2019 (58)
  • February 2019 (11)
  • January 2019 (90)
  • December 2018 (97)
  • November 2018 (43)
  • October 2018 (31)
  • September 2018 (73)
  • August 2018 (47)
  • July 2018 (143)
  • June 2018 (92)
  • May 2018 (102)
  • April 2018 (59)
  • March 2018 (8)

Blogroll

  • Daaman Promoting Harmony 0
  • Fight against Legal Terrorism Fight against Legal Terrorism along with MyNation Foundation 0
  • Good Morning Good Morning News 0
  • Insaaf India Insaaf Awareness Movement 0
  • MyNation Hope Foundation Wiki 0
  • MyNation.net Equality, Justice and Harmony 0
  • Sarvepalli Legal 0
  • Save Indian Family Save Indian Family Movement 0
  • SIF Chandigarh SIF Chandigarh 0
  • The Male Factor The Male Factor 0
  • Vaastav Foundation The Social Reality 0
  • Voice4india Indian Laws, Non-profits, Environment 0
  • Writing Law Writing Law by Ankur 0

RSS Cloudflare Status

  • Maintenance impacting SSL API availability and certificate issuance February 14, 2023
    THIS IS A SCHEDULED EVENT Feb 14, 14:00 - 16:00 UTCJan 26, 10:38 UTCScheduled - On February 14th, 2023, Cloudflare will be doing database maintenance that will impact SSL API availability and may result in certificate issuance delays. The scheduled maintenance will be on February 14, 2023, 14:00 - 16:00 UTC.During the maintenance window, SSL-related […]
  • CDG (Paris) on 2023-02-10 February 10, 2023
    THIS IS A SCHEDULED EVENT Feb 10, 01:00 - 06:00 UTCFeb 3, 11:40 UTCScheduled - We will be performing scheduled maintenance in CDG (Paris) datacenter on 2023-02-10 between 01:00 and 06:00 UTC. Traffic might be re-routed from this location, hence there is a possibility of a slight increase in latency during this maintenance window for […]
  • CDG (Paris) on 2023-02-09 February 9, 2023
    THIS IS A SCHEDULED EVENT Feb 9, 01:00 - 06:00 UTCFeb 3, 11:40 UTCScheduled - We will be performing scheduled maintenance in CDG (Paris) datacenter on 2023-02-09 between 01:00 and 06:00 UTC. Traffic might be re-routed from this location, hence there is a possibility of a slight increase in latency during this maintenance window for […]

RSS List of Spam Server IPs from Project Honeypot

  • 178.211.132.200 | S February 5, 2023
    Event: Bad Event | Total: 972 | First: 2023-01-04 | Last: 2023-02-05
  • 192.142.21.131 | S February 5, 2023
    Event: Bad Event | Total: 461 | First: 2023-01-11 | Last: 2023-02-05
  • 178.211.132.226 | S February 5, 2023
    Event: Bad Event | Total: 1,005 | First: 2023-01-04 | Last: 2023-02-05
Proudly powered by WordPress
Theme: Flint by Star Verte LLC

Bad Behavior has blocked 592 access attempts in the last 7 days.

pixel