Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (3.81 seconds)
Smt. Vandana Sharma vs Sh. Vinod Kumar Rai on 25 June, 2010 cites

Savitri Pandey vs Prem Chandra Pandey on 8 January, 2002

29. The Ld. Counsel for the respondent had argued that it has been held that the wife is not entitled to maintenance if she is capable of earning but other circumstances such as responsibility to look after the child have also to be taken into consideration. The Ld. Counsel for the respondent has relied upon Savitri Pandey Vs. Prem Chand Pandey to the effect that a wife has no absolute right of maintenance.
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 291 - R P Sethi - Full Document

Manokaran @ Ramamoorthy vs M. Devaki on 21 February, 2003

Orders passed by Hon'ble High Court in Kavita Prasad Vs. Ram Ashray Prasad, Manokaran @ Ramamoorthy Vs. M. Devaki, Kumarsean Vs. Aswathi, Vijay C.C. No. 172/1 -30- Kumar Vs. Harsh Lata Aggarwal, (2003) 1 MLJ 752 (Mad) Manokaran @ Ramamoorthy Vs. M. Devaki, Shiv Kumar Yadav Vs. Santoshii Yadav, Manish Kumar Vs. Pratibha, Neeraj Aggarwal Vs. Veeka Agarwal (Judgment of Ld. ADJ), G. Mariah Vs. G. Vijayalakshmi, Sanjay Sudhakar Bhosale Vs. Khristina. The law in this regard in well settled but as observed other circumstances have also to be taken into consideration. Moreover, the petitioner No. 2 is a minor child and clearly and incapable of earning herself.
Madras High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 16 - P Sathasivam - Full Document

Shiv Kumar Yadav vs Smt. Santoshii Yadav on 4 February, 2004

Orders passed by Hon'ble High Court in Kavita Prasad Vs. Ram Ashray Prasad, Manokaran @ Ramamoorthy Vs. M. Devaki, Kumarsean Vs. Aswathi, Vijay C.C. No. 172/1 -30- Kumar Vs. Harsh Lata Aggarwal, (2003) 1 MLJ 752 (Mad) Manokaran @ Ramamoorthy Vs. M. Devaki, Shiv Kumar Yadav Vs. Santoshii Yadav, Manish Kumar Vs. Pratibha, Neeraj Aggarwal Vs. Veeka Agarwal (Judgment of Ld. ADJ), G. Mariah Vs. G. Vijayalakshmi, Sanjay Sudhakar Bhosale Vs. Khristina. The law in this regard in well settled but as observed other circumstances have also to be taken into consideration. Moreover, the petitioner No. 2 is a minor child and clearly and incapable of earning herself.
Chattisgarh High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 4 - L C Bhadoo - Full Document
1   2 Next