Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.36 seconds)
Annurita Vohra vs Sandeep Vohra on 15 March, 2004 cites

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

In Jasbir Kaur Sehgal v. District Judge, Dehradun and Ors., , it has been observed that - "no set formula can be laid for fixing the amount of maintenance. It has, in the very nature of things, to depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. Some scope for leverage can, however, be always there. 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

Harminder Kaur vs Sukhwinder Singh on 7 January, 2002

3. Observations in similar vein have been made by a Learned Single Judge of this Court in Harminder Kaur vs. Sukhwinder Singh, 2002 VI AD (DELHI) 797. S.N. Kapoor, J. had opined that one should not be oblivious of the fact that equal status has been given to the Indian women under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and that she should live according to the status of her husband along with the child of the parties. The Learned Judge had ordered that the income has to be equitably apportioned for maintenance of wife and the child. In his opinion the income should have been divided into five units, two units for each of the parents and one for the young child. On a disposable income of Rs.12,000/- he had granted Rs.7,200/- per month for the maintenance of the wife and the child.
Delhi High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 12 - S N Kapoor - Full Document

Shiv Shakti Coop. Housing Society, ... vs M/S. Swaraj Developers & Ors on 17 April, 2003

5. The determination of maintenance pendente lite is essentially an interim measure which normally does not call for interference under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, especially after the amendments carried out in the Code of Civil Procedure. On an understanding of the law as enunciated in Shiv Shakti Coop. Housing Society, Nagpur vs. Swaraj Developers and Ors., , no scope for discussion on this question remains.
Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 1808 - A Pasayat - Full Document
1