Disposed

Smt. Vandana Pandey v. Nitesh Pandey

Chhattisgarh HC11 Jul 2018CRR/461/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An application for interim maintenance was rejected by the Family Court as the husband claimed insufficient grounds for separation. The Supreme Court/High Court disposed of the revision with liberty for the wife to file a fresh application if her amendment plea is allowed.

What did the court decide?

The revision is disposed of with liberty for the applicant-wife to file a fresh application for interim maintenance if her amendment application is allowed.

Smt. Vandana Pandey Vs Nitesh Pandey — Maintenance and Alimony | Chhattisgarh HC (2018)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

Criminal Revision No.461 of 2018

¶4

Smt. Vandana Pandey, W/o Nitesh Pandey, D/o Raju Neti, aged about 28 years, resident of In front of Sahid Bhagat Singh School, House of Tarun Kumar, House near to Gulab Ram Dange, Aditya Nagar, Durg, Tahsil and District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶5

---- Applicant

¶6

versus

¶7

Nitesh Pandey, S/o Late Jagat Narayan Pandey, aged about 26 years, resident of Sant Asha Ram Bapu Nagar, Ward No.4, Police Station Jamul, Tahsil and District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶8

--- Respondent

¶9

For Applicant : Shri Jitendra Gupta, Advocate For Respondent : Shri Ritesh Verma, Advocate

¶10

Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel

¶11

Order on Board

¶12

11.7.2018

¶13

1. With the consent of Learned Counsel appearing for the parties, the matter is heard finally.

¶14

2. The instant revision has been preferred against the order dated 18.1.2018 passed by the 1^st Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg in Case No.395 of 2016, whereby the application submitted by the Applicant/wife for grant of interim maintenance has been rejected on the ground that the Applicant/wife has not disclosed any sufficient reason for which she is residing separately from the Respondent/husband.

¶15

3. Learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant/wife submits that the Family Court has rejected the application only on the ground that as per the pleadings of the Applicant/wife, she stayed with the Respondent/husband only for 3 days. He further submits that the

¶16

¶17

Applicant/wife has already moved an application for amendment of her pleadings. Therefore, he prays that the instant revision may be disposed of with an observation that if the amendment application is allowed, the Applicant/wife shall be at liberty to file a fresh application for grant of interim maintenance.

¶18

4. Reserving the aforesaid liberty in favour of the Applicant/wife, the instant revision is disposed of.

¶19

Sd/( Arvind Singh Chandel ) Judge

¶20

Gopal

Smt. Vandana Pandey v. Nitesh Pandey

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Vandana Pandey v. Nitesh Pandey

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Samsul Tamrej and Anr. Vs State

Umesh Kumar Lahare Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shivprasad Satnami Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Shyam Tiwari and Anr. Vs the State of Madhya Pradesh

Minor Jubin Kujur Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Manglu Vs State of Chhattisgarh