An application filed to challenge a Family Court order rejecting maintenance was dismissed because the petitioner and opposite party were residing together as husband and wife, leading to non-prosecution.
Instant application dismissed for non-prosecution.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No. 965 of 2006
Sukumbati Devi. ..… Petitioner
Versus
1.The State of Jharkhand. 2.Gajo Verma. ..... Opposite Parties
--------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
For the Petitioner : For the State : Mr. Gautma Rakesh, APP
08/Dated: 11th November, 2022
None appears for the petitioner, even after a repeated
calls.
(Deepak Roshan, J.)
Amardeep/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to allow revision challenging the denial of maintenance when parties reside together.
Sukumbati Devi
The State of Jharkhand
Gajo Verma
Deepak Roshan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
