T.Balaji v. B.Nalini
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Madras dismissed a criminal revision petition challenging an order under Section 125 Cr.P.C. holding that the petitioner, despite unemployment claims, had sufficient probable earnings to pay the fixed monthly maintenance to the respondent.
What did the court decide?
Revision petition dismissed; direction to pay maintenance as per order fixed in M.C. No. 24 of 2008.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 28.04.2018
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.PONGIAPPAN
Crl.R.C.No. 1248 of 2011 and M.P. No. 1 of 2011
T.Balaji .. Petitioner Vs. B.Nalini .. Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C. praying to set aside the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Mayiladuthurai in M.C. No. 24 of 2008 dated 22.03.2011.
For Petitioners : M/s. K.M.Vijayan Associates For Respondent : No Appearance O R D E R
This revision has been filed to set aside the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Mayiladuthurai in M.C. No. 24 of 2008 dated 22.03.2011.
- The case of the petitioner in the trial Court is that on 01.06.2005, the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized in the residence of the petitioner. Subsequent to that, both the petitioner and the respondent lived together without any misunderstanding. After one year, the petitioner, in a drunken mood, assaulted the respondent and insulted by saying infertile. Further, he threatened her for giving consent to marry some other lady. Therefore, the respondent had lodged a complaint before the police. In the enquiry, the petitioner had given assurance that he will not commit any mistake in future. Inspite of the assurance given by the petitioner, the petitioner again started to insult the respondent. Hence, the respondent had left the matrimonial home after filing the petition before the court, by saying that she is not having any means to maintain herself.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the revision petitioner had sufficient means to pay the maintenance fixed by the trial court.
Whether the respondent left the matrimonial home unwillingly.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
T. Balaji
- respondent
B. Nalini
Coram
R. Pongiappan
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court