Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 30 (0.94 seconds)

Bhuwan Mohan Singh vs Meena & Ors on 15 July, 2014

8.6 At  this   juncture,  the   decision   of   the   Apex  Court   rendered   in   the   case   of  Bhuwan   Mohan   Singh   v.   Meena   and   others,   reported   in   AIR   2014   SC   2875,   requires   a   reference,   wherein  Page 20 of 36 HC-NIC Page 20 of 36 Created On Sat Aug 22 01:46:12 IST 2015 R/CR.RA/671/2014 CAV JUDGMENT the   Apex   Court   has   held   and   observed   that  giving maintenance is not for animal living. It  would   be   profitable   to   quote   the   relevant  findings   of   the   said   decision,   which   read   as  under :
Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 393 - D Misra - Full Document

Shamima Farooqui vs Shahid Khan on 6 April, 2015

8.7 An   unfortunate   event   must   not   make   her  plight   miserable   and   send   her   from   pillar   to  post   arranging   for   her   sustenance.   The   Apex  Court   in   a   decision   rendered   in   the   case   of  Shamima  Farooqui   v.  Shahid  Khan,   reported  in   (2015) 5 SCC 705, has at length considered the  plight   of   the   women   asking   for   maintenance  under the distress. It would be profitable to  reproduce   some   of   the   relevant   findings   and  observations of the said decision, which read  as under :
Supreme Court of India Cites 22 - Cited by 541 - D Misra - Full Document

Smt. Jasbir Kaur Sehgal vs The District Judge Dehradun & Ors on 27 August, 1997

There   can   be   no   shadow   of   doubt   that   an   order under Section 125 CrPC  can be passed  if a person despite having sufficient means  neglects   or   refuses   to   maintain   the   wife.  Sometimes, a plea is advanced by the husband   that he does not have the means to pay, for   he  does   not  have   a  job   or   his  business  is   not doing well. These are only bald excuses  and, in fact, they have no acceptability in  law. If the husband is healthy, able bodied  and is in a position to support himself, he  is under the legal obligation to support his   wife,   for   wife's   right   to   receive  maintenance  under   Section   125   CrPC,   unless  disqualified,   is   an   absolute   right.   While  determining the quantum of maintenance, this   Court   in  Jabsir   Kaur   Sehgal   v.   District  Judge Dehradun & Ors. has held as follows:­ Page 24 of 36 HC-NIC Page 24 of 36 Created On Sat Aug 22 01:46:12 IST 2015 R/CR.RA/671/2014 CAV JUDGMENT "The court has to consider the status of the   parties,   their   respective   needs,   the   capacity of the husband to pay having regard   to   his   reasonable   expenses   for   his   own  maintenance and of those he is obliged under   the   law   and   statutory   but   involuntary  payments   or   deductions.   The   amount   of  maintenance   fixed   for   the   wife   should   be  such as she can live in reasonable comfort  considering her status and the mode of life  she   was   used   to   when   she   lived   with   her   husband   and   also   that   she   does   not   feel  handicapped in the prosecution of her case.  At the same time, the amount so fixed cannot  be excessive or extortionate."
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 471 - D P Wadhwa - Full Document

Chaturbhuj vs Sita Bai on 27 November, 2007

In  Chaturbhuj   v.   Sita   Bai,   it  has been ruled that :­  "Section   125   CrPC   is   a   measure   of   social   justice and is specially enacted to protect  women   and   children   and   as   noted   by   this  Court   in  Captain   Ramesh   Chander   Kaushal  v.  Veena   Kaushal  falls   within   constitutional  sweep of Article 15(3) reinforced by Article   39 of the Constitution of India. It is meant  to achieve a social purpose. The object is  to   prevent   vagrancy   and   destitution.   It  provides a speedy remedy for the supply of  Page 25 of 36 HC-NIC Page 25 of 36 Created On Sat Aug 22 01:46:12 IST 2015 R/CR.RA/671/2014 CAV JUDGMENT food,   clothing   and   shelter   to   the   deserted   wife. It gives effect to fundamental rights  and natural duties of a man to maintain his  wife,   children   and   parents   when   they   are  unable to maintain themselves.
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 412 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Captain Ramesh Chander Kaushal vs Mrs. Veena Kaushal And Ors. on 22 August, 1978

In  Chaturbhuj   v.   Sita   Bai,   it  has been ruled that :­  "Section   125   CrPC   is   a   measure   of   social   justice and is specially enacted to protect  women   and   children   and   as   noted   by   this  Court   in  Captain   Ramesh   Chander   Kaushal  v.  Veena   Kaushal  falls   within   constitutional  sweep of Article 15(3) reinforced by Article   39 of the Constitution of India. It is meant  to achieve a social purpose. The object is  to   prevent   vagrancy   and   destitution.   It  provides a speedy remedy for the supply of  Page 25 of 36 HC-NIC Page 25 of 36 Created On Sat Aug 22 01:46:12 IST 2015 R/CR.RA/671/2014 CAV JUDGMENT food,   clothing   and   shelter   to   the   deserted   wife. It gives effect to fundamental rights  and natural duties of a man to maintain his  wife,   children   and   parents   when   they   are  unable to maintain themselves.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 331 - Full Document

Savitaben Somabhai Bhatiya vs State Of Gujarat And Ors on 10 March, 2005

The aforesaid   position   was   highlighted   in  Savitaben  Somabhai Bhatiya v. State of Gujarat."  This  being   the   position   in   law,   it   is   the   obligation   of   the   husband   to   maintain   his  wife. He cannot be permitted to plead that  he   is   unable   to   maintain   the   wife   due   to  financial   constraints   as   long   as   he   is  capable of earning.
Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 331 - A Pasayat - Full Document
1   2 3 Next