C.Devasenapathy, Aged 36 Yrs v. D.Radha, Aged 32 Years
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court confirmed the Appellate Court's orders enhancing interim maintenance for the wife and son under the DV Act, finding the petitioner had sufficient income from salary and family property. The trial court was directed to conclude the DV case within three months.
What did the court decide?
Confirmed orders for interim monthly maintenance of Rs.15,000 to the petitioner (wife) and Rs.8,000 to the minor son.
What the court decided
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Reserved on : 13.03.2018
Pronounced on : 18.04.2018
C O R A M
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.V.MURALIDARAN
Crl.R.C.Nos.64 and 65 of 2018
and
Crl.M.P.Nos.470 and 471 of 2018
Crl.R.C.No.64 of 2017
C.Devasenapathy .. Petitioner
Vs.
D.Radha .. Respondent
AND
Crl.R.C.No.65 of 2017
C.Devasenapathy .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.D.Radha
2.Minor D.Prakulraja .. Respondents
(Minor represented by his mother/guardian
D.Radha)
2
COMMON PRAYER: Criminal Revisions filed under Section 397 read with 401 of Cr.P.C., against the order passed by the 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirupur in C.A.Nos.55 and 54 of 2017, dated 24.11.2017 against the order passed in Crl.M.P.Nos.3954 and 3366 of 2016, dated 17.04.2017, by the Judicial Magistrate of Palladam in DVA.No.7 of 2016.
(Both the Crl.R.Cs) For Petitioner : Mr.V.S.Kesavan For Respondents : Mr.P.M.Duraiswamy O R D E R
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the interim maintenance orders enhanced by the Appellate Court require interference in the present revision.
Whether the petitioner has sufficient income to meet the maintenance granted to the wife and son.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
C.Devasenapathy
- respondent
D.Radha
- respondent
Minor D.Prakulraja
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court