Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Sau. Jiya vs Kuldeep on 1 October, 2024

Author: Vikram Nath

Bench: Vikram Nath

                                                        1

     ITEM NO.27                             COURT NO.7                       SECTION IX

                                 S U P R E M E C O U R T O F           I N D I A
                                         RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

     Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)                      No(s).      24893/2018

     (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 25-04-2018
     in FCA No. 37/2017 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Bombay
     At Nagpur)

     SAU. JIYA                                                                Petitioner(s)

                                                       VERSUS

     KULDEEP                                                                  Respondent(s)

     Date : 01-10-2024 This petition was called on for hearing today.

     CORAM :
                          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH
                          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASANNA B. VARALE

     For Petitioner(s)               Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, AOR
                                     Ms. Surabhi Jain, Adv.

     For Respondent(s)               Mr. Md. Shahid Anwar, AOR (SCLSC)

                                     Mr. Shakul R. Ghatole, Adv.
                                     Mr. Vatsalya Vigya, AOR


                         UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                                              O R D E R

Mr. Shahid Anwar, learned counsel, who has been appointed through the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee, states that now the respondent has engaged a counsel of his choice, he may be discharged from this case. We order accordingly.

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that Signature Not Verified the monthly income of the respondent is more than Digitally signed by Neetu Khajuria Date: 2024.10.03 18:13:38 IST Reason: Rs.1,30,000/- (Rupees one lakh thirty thousand only) per month, as he is getting about Rs.80,000/- (Rupees 2 eight thousand only) from Gym where he works and Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) from SPANCO.

It is also submitted that the respondent has two houses in his name and also has three wives.

Let all such facts be placed on record by way of an affidavit because we find that only a meager amount of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) per month was awarded under Section 125 Cr.P.C. proceedings as maintenance, which also the respondent has challenged by way of revision, which shows that the respondent does not want to support his wife at all, even though he got a divorce decree from the Family Court and also confirmed by the High Court.

According to the learned counsel for the respondent, the respondent is a daily-wage labourer as he works on contract basis as Electrician, and therefore, he gets a very nominal amount only for the days on which he gets work.

Let both sides file their respective affidavits. Respondent will file his affidavit of assets/income within four weeks and the petitioner will place all the relevant facts as recorded above in the affidavit.

List the matter again on 05.11.2024.

   (NEETU KHAJURIA)                               (RANJANA SHAILEY)
ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS                               COURT MASTER