Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (0.94 seconds)
Vivek Sethi vs Ritu Sethi on 10 December, 2021 cites

Sanjay Damodar Kale vs Kalyani Sanjay Kale on 6 August, 2020

36. Furthermore, as laid down in Sanjay Damodar Kaley v. Kalyani Sanjay Kaley; 2020 SCC OnLine Bom 694 as regards the contention raised on behalf of 'V' that 'R' has a potential to earn and does not seek to so earn, as observed by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in Sanjay Damodar Kale V. Kalyani Sanjay Kale, placing reliance on the verdict of Sunita Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:10.12.2021 17:37:50 This file is digitally signed by Crl.Rev.P. Nos.830/2019 & 869/2019 Page 30 of 33 PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 44 - Full Document

Rajnesh vs Neha on 4 November, 2020

38. As laid down in Rajnesh V. Neha and Ors. (supra) the test for determination of maintenance in matrimonial disputes depends on the financial status of the respondent, i.e.,( the husband) and the standard of living that the applicant (the wife) was accustomed to in her matrimonial home and that though the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:10.12.2021 17:37:50 This file is digitally signed by Crl.Rev.P. Nos.830/2019 & 869/2019 Page 31 of 33 PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
Supreme Court of India Cites 139 - Cited by 1507 - I Malhotra - Full Document

Sunita Kachwaha And Ors vs Anil Kuchwaha on 28 October, 2014

90.3. The Bombay High Court in Sanjay Damodar Kale v. Kalyani Sanjay Kale [Sanjay Damodar Kale v. Kalyani Sanjay Kale, 2020 SCC OnLine Bom 694] while relying upon the judgment in Sunita Kachwaha [Sunita Kachwaha v. Anil Kachwaha, (2014) 16 SCC 715 : (2015) 3 SCC (Civ) 753 : (2015) 3 SCC (Cri) 589] , held that neither the mere potential to earn, nor the actual earning of the wife, howsoever meagre, is sufficient to deny the claim of maintenance. 90.4.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 216 - R Banumathi - Full Document

Chander Parkash Bodh Raj vs Shila Rani Chander Prakash on 16 April, 1968

90.5. This Court in Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan [Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan, (2015) 5 SCC 705 : (2015) 3 SCC (Civ) 274 : (2015) 2 SCC (Cri) 785] cited the judgment in Chander Parkash [Chander Parkash v. Shila Rani, 1968 SCC OnLine Del 52 : AIR 1968 Del 174] with approval, and held that the obligation of the husband to provide maintenance stands on a higher pedestal than the wife.
Delhi High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 162 - I D Dua - Full Document

Satish Chander Ahuja vs Sneha Ahuja on 15 October, 2020

88. The right of a woman to reside in a "shared household" defined under Section 2(s) entitles the aggrieved woman for right of residence in the shared household, irrespective of her having any legal interest in the same. This Court in Satish Chander Ahuja v. Sneha Ahuja [Satish Chander Ahuja v. Sneha Ahuja, (2021) 1 SCC 414, by a Bench comprising of Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy and M.R. Shah, JJ.] held that "shared household" referred to in Section 2(s) is the shared household of the aggrieved person where she was Signature living at the time when the application was filed, or at any Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:10.12.2021 17:37:50 This file is digitally signed by Crl.Rev.P. Nos.830/2019 & 869/2019 Page 26 of 33 PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
Supreme Court of India Cites 132 - Cited by 199 - A Bhushan - Full Document

Shailja vs Khobbanna on 18 January, 2017

In Shailja v. Khobbanna [Shailja v. Khobbanna, (2018) 12 SCC 199 : (2018) 5 SCC (Civ) 308; See also the decision of the Karnataka High Court in P. Suresh v. S. Deepa, 2016 SCC OnLine Kar 8848 : 2016 Cri LJ 4794 (Kar)] , this Court held that merely because the wife is capable of earning, it would not be a sufficient ground to reduce the maintenance awarded by the Family Court. The Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:10.12.2021 17:37:50 This file is digitally signed by Crl.Rev.P. Nos.830/2019 & 869/2019 Page 27 of 33 PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 146 - Full Document

P Suresh vs S Deepa on 3 October, 2016

In Shailja v. Khobbanna [Shailja v. Khobbanna, (2018) 12 SCC 199 : (2018) 5 SCC (Civ) 308; See also the decision of the Karnataka High Court in P. Suresh v. S. Deepa, 2016 SCC OnLine Kar 8848 : 2016 Cri LJ 4794 (Kar)] , this Court held that merely because the wife is capable of earning, it would not be a sufficient ground to reduce the maintenance awarded by the Family Court. The Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:10.12.2021 17:37:50 This file is digitally signed by Crl.Rev.P. Nos.830/2019 & 869/2019 Page 27 of 33 PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 13 - N V Ramana - Full Document
1   2 Next