Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.29 seconds)
Vishal Kapoor vs Yashna Kapoor on 21 November, 2013 cites

Gaurav Sondhi vs Diya Sondhi on 3 May, 2005

Having regard to the overall conspectus of circumstances, and in the light of the above discussion, this Court is of the opinion that the Trial Court's determination that the applicant/wife should be granted interim maintenance @ `15000/- per month and minor daughter (Sagarika Kapur) is entitled to `10,000/- per month from the date of filing of the applications till the disposal of the case on merits or till they are legally entitled to receive the same does not call for interference. The husband is directed to clear all arrears of maintenance within four weeks from today in equal installments and to furnish the monthly MAT. APPL(F.C.)24/2013 Page 11 maintenance after the date of orders by way of money order or by deposit in the bank account of the wife on her furnishing the account number of the same, by or before 10th date of each English calendar month. The default shall be viewed in terms of the Trial Court's order, i.e. the consequences spelt out by judgment of this Court in Gaurav Sondhi v. Diya Sondhi 120 (2005) DLT 426. Furthermore, in accordance with settled law, the respondents would be entitled to the maintenance of the highest amount among the various allowances awarded, if any to them by various courts. The present appeal and pending application are dismissed, in the above terms.
Delhi High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 278 - M Mudgal - Full Document

Mr. Sanjiv Sangwan vs Smt. Sangeeta Sangwan on 7 August, 2007

7. The Trial Court recollected the relevant principles to be applied by Courts, outlined in Sanjiv Sangwan v. Sangeeta Sangwan 143 (2007) DLT 306; Bharat Hegde v. Smt. Saroj Hegde, 140 (2007) DLT 16 and Jayant Bhargava v. Priya Bhargava 181 (2011) DLT 602, i.e. status of parties; reasonable wants of the claimant; the independent income and property of the claimant; the number of dependents of the non-applicant whom he has to maintain; the amount should aid the applicant to live in a similar life style as he/she enjoyed in the matrimonial home; non applicant's liabilities, if any; provisions for food, clothing, education, medical attendance and treatment etc., of the applicant; payment capacity of the non-applicant. The Court also MAT. APPL(F.C.)24/2013 Page 5 stated that some guesswork is not ruled out while estimating the income of the non-applicant when all the source of correct sources are not disclosed and that the non-applicant would defray the cost of litigation.
Delhi High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 8 - P Nandrajog - Full Document
1   2 Next