Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.39 seconds)
Documents citing Hansaben Rameshkumar Patani vs Rameshkumar Ratilal Patani And Anr. on 18 March, 1992

Hansaben vs State on 9 April, 2012

Learned advocate for the petitioner has relied upon decision of this Court in case of Hansaben, wife of Rameshkumar Ratilal Patani Vs. Rameshkumar Ratilal Patani and another, reported in 1993 (1) G.L.H. pg.886, and contended that the two proceedings namely civil proceedings under Hindu Marriage Act 1955 and under Criminal Procedure Code are distinct and separate and that the Court was not justified in accepting the submission of husband in rejecting application under section 127 Cr.P.C. made by the wife / petitioner herein.
Gujarat High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - S R Brahmbhatt - Full Document

Hansaben vs State on 30 August, 2011

Learned advocate for the petitioner has relied upon decision of this Court in case of Hansaben, wife of Rameshkumar Ratilal Patani Vs. Rameshkumar Ratilal Patani and another, reported in 1993 (1) G.L.H. pg.886, and contended that the two proceedings namely civil proceedings under Hindu Marriage Act 1955 and under Criminal Procedure Code are distinct and separate and that the Court was not justified in accepting the submission of husband in rejecting application under section 127 Cr.P.C. made by the wife / petitioner herein.
Gujarat High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - S R Brahmbhatt - Full Document

Divyesh Atulbhai Lalvala vs Amisha W/O. Divyesh Atulbhai Lalvani & on 28 June, 2016

6. However, if we peruse the entire judgment, it becomes clear that the issue before the Court in such reported judgment was regarding set- off of two different amount granted by two different Court in two different provisions viz.one u/s.125 of Cr.P.C. and second order Page 6 of 11 HC-NIC Page 6 of 11 Created On Thu Jun 30 02:50:42 IST 2016 R/CR.RA/164/2016 ORDER u/s.24 of the Hindu Marriage Act in pending litigation between the parties. It is to be noted that such judgment is prior to the amendment of 2001 in Cr.P.C., when there is no provision for interim maintenance u/s.125 of the Cr.P.C., but when maintenance was awarded both u/s.125 of the Criminal Procedur Code and u/s.24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, the single Judge of this High Court has on the contrary confirmed that set-off of such award of interim maintenance cannot be given while deciding an application for maintenance u/s.125 of the Cr.P.C. What is decided in such judgment is recorded in paragraph 12, which confirms that in fact deserted wife will be entitled to pursue the legal remedy available to her for enforcement of the maintenance order u/s.125 of Cr.P.C. so also enforcement of an order of interim alimony under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act by taking appropriate proceedings before the competent Court. Thereby, the Court has made it clear that it need not be emphasised that an application for enforcement of arrears of maintenance under Sec 125(3) of the Code will not be a ban or bar for recovery of the amount of interim alimony by the wife from the husband by invoking the aids of the appropriate legal remedies before the competent Court. Therefore, I fail to understand that why or how this judgment Page 7 of 11 HC-NIC Page 7 of 11 Created On Thu Jun 30 02:50:42 IST 2016 R/CR.RA/164/2016 ORDER would help the applicant to get rid of the impugned order.
Gujarat High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - S G Shah - Full Document

Amit Mahendra Bansal vs State Of Gujarat & 2 on 29 June, 2016

3. However, learned advocate for the applicant on such issue is relying upon a decision in the case of Hansaben, wife of Rameshkumar Ratilal Patani Vs. Rameshkumar Ratilal Patani & Anr. reported in 1993(1) GLH 886 is material. If we peruse the entire judgment, it becomes clear that the issue before the Court in such reported judgment was regarding set-off of two different amounts granted by two different Court in two different provisions viz.one u/s.125 of Cr.P.C. and second order u/s.24 of the Hindu Marriage Act in pending litigation between the parties. It is to be noted that such judgment is prior to the amendment of 2001 in Cr.P.C., when there is no provision for interim maintenance u/s.125 of the Cr.P.C., but when maintenance was awarded both u/s.125 of the Criminal Procedur Code and u/s.24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, the single Judge of this High Court has on the contrary confirmed that set- off of such award of interim maintenance cannot be given while deciding an application for maintenance u/s.125 of the Cr.P.C. What is decided in such judgment is recorded in paragraph 12, which confirms that in fact deserted wife will be entitled to pursue the legal remedy available to her for enforcement of the maintenance order u/s.125 of Cr.P.C.
Gujarat High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - S G Shah - Full Document
1