Rahamathulla vs Piyare And Others on 11 April, 1996
In Shaik Mahboob Hasha v. Shaik Karimunnisa Begum, (1989 Cri LJ 2295), Bhaskar Rao, J. of Andhra Pradesh High Court has observed as follows :-
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 2 of 2 (0.69 seconds)Syed Iqbal Hussain vs Syed Nasamunnissa Begum And Ors. on 5 August, 1991
8. The provision of S. 3(i)(b) is subject matter of interpretation by my learned brother Y. Bhaskar Rao J. in Shaik Mahaboob Basha v. Shaik Karimunnisa Begum (2) (1989) 2 Andh LT 292 : (1989 Cri LJ 2295) and M. A. Hameed v. Arif Jain (3) 1990 Cri LJ 96 (Andh Pra). The learned judge held that the provision of S. 125, Cr.P.C. are not repugnant to the Act and that the children of divorced wife and husband who cross the age of two years are entitled to maintenance u/S. 125, Cr.P.C. The learned judge held that the right of child to claim maintenance u/S. 125 of Cr.P.C. is not taken away by S. 3 of the Act, but it has given additional safeguard to the children as in the cases referred to above. The maintenances was awarded in this case in MC 41/83 much earlier to the commencement of the Act. As held by the learned judge, there is no provision under the Act taking away the right of child to claim maintenance u/S. 125 of Cr.P.C. and that the cancellation of maintenance granted to the child is erroneous.
1