First Appeal against Family Court order granting restitution of conjugal rights and directing husband to pay Rs. 1000 monthly. Court dismissed appeal, upholding minor maintenance as part of permanent case measures without fresh application.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
C/FA/2266/2018 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2266 of 2018
==========================================================
HIRENKUMAR VANRAJBHAI DATANIA
Versus
VAISHAKHI D/O MANHARBHAI MAGANBHAI TALPADA
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. MAHITOSH U SINGH(7015) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 NAYANKUMAR M NIMBARK(7850) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MR M M TALPADA(6487) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 MR RAXIT J DHOLAKIA(3709) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.N. KARIA
Date : 05/07/2018 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)
Page 1 of 3
C/FA/2266/2018 ORDER
apart from the allegation of the concealment of the mental state of the wife, the husband even failed to prove that the wife suffered from any mental disturbance. Any such allegation cannot be lightly accepted in absence of any proof. The Family Court correctly therefore did not accept the husband's defence.
Page 2 of 3
C/FA/2266/2018 ORDER
decree or any time subsequent thereto to provide either lumpsum or periodic payment by way of maintenance. This section of course talks of such an order being passed on an application by the concerned party. However, looking to the small amount concerned and the fact that such amount was anyway being paid by the husband since 2012 as ordered by the Court, only on this ground we are not inclined to interfere.
(AKIL KURESHI, J)
(B.N. KARIA, J)
JYOTI V. JANI
Page 3 of 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Family Court could continue maintenance payment in the absence of a fresh application under Section 125 CrPC.
Whether the appeal against the restitution of conjugal rights decree should be allowed.
HIRENKUMAR VANRAJBHAI DATANIA
VAISHAKHI D/O MANHARBHAI MAGANBHAI TALPADA
AKIL KURESHI
B.N. KARIA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
