Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.24 seconds)Section 127 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 126 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Vithalrao Marotrao Awadhut vs Ratnaprabha Awadhut And Ors. on 8 March, 1978
In V.M. Avadhut's case there was an order directing payment of maintenance to the wife and child. She again filed a separate application alleging that the husband was not paying maintenance regularly. The second application was filed before another court. The proceedings were under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. The Bombay High Court held that the second application was not maintainable and the remedy of the wife was to file an application for getting arrears of maintenance. The principle decided in the above decision has no bearing on the controversy in this case.
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Kunnasikaru Membattikalathil Pappi ... vs Ravimandirathil Thamasikkum Arikkare ... on 17 July, 1973
10. The first three sub-sections of Section 127 deal with circumstances under which the Magistrate could bring about alterations in, cancellation of or variation in the order passed, under Section 125. Sub-section (1) deals with an alteration in the allowance as the Magistrate thinks fit, on proof of a change in the circumstances of any person receiving, or ordered to pay monthly allowance. There is no doubt, that under this provision, an order directing payment of maintenance could even set be at naught, on proof of a change in the relevant circumstances. The expression "alteration" used in Sub-section (1) would contemplate such an order also. See Pappi Kovilamma v. Mopil Eradi 1973 Mad LJ (Cri) 599 (Ker). By no stretch of imagination can it be said that sub-Section (1) contemplates alteration in any manner of an earlier decision or order rejecting the claim made under Section 125 of the Code. Sub-section (1) contemplates only an alteration of an order passed under Section 125 of the Code directing payment of maintenance allowance.
1