Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.15 seconds)Shambu Reddy vs Ghalamma on 7 April, 1966
A similar view was taken by the Mysore High Court in the case of Shambu Reddy v. Ghalamma, 1966 Cr LJ 1291 : AIR 1966 Mys 311 and the Patna High Court in the case of Abdul Ghaffar v. Bibi Hafiza Khatoon .
Ramji Malviya vs Smt. Munni Devi Malviya on 20 March, 1959
Desai, J. (as he then was) in the case of Ramji Malviya v. Munni Devi Malviya no doubt, took the view that the first proviso to Sub-section (3) of Section 488, Cr. P. C governs only Sub-section (3) and not subsection (1). But he held that even then the wife's refusal to live with the husband on account of remarriage may be the sufficient reason within Sub-section (4) of Section 488, Cr, P.C. In case, she has separated on a just ground and her husband has not made any provision for her maintenance, it will amount to neglect or refusal to maintain her. The Magistrate was justified in taking into consideration the circumstances that she had been given .75 acres of land. But he should .also give a definite finding whether she is being actually benefited by that land or not and whether it is actually under the cultival tion of Jagdish Narain. He should also decide whether that is sufficient for her maintenance and what should be "the quantum of maintenance.
Abdul Ghaffar vs Bibi Hafiza Khatoon on 1 August, 1967
A similar view was taken by the Mysore High Court in the case of Shambu Reddy v. Ghalamma, 1966 Cr LJ 1291 : AIR 1966 Mys 311 and the Patna High Court in the case of Abdul Ghaffar v. Bibi Hafiza Khatoon .
1