The High Court of Orissa dismissed a CRLMC seeking quashment of a Family Court order issuing DW and NBW for recovery of interim maintenance. The court held the prayer was devoid of merit as the challenged order was restricted to maintenance due for twelve months preceding the petition filing.
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 ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.2347 of 2021
Nirmal Kumar Mallick.
…. Petitioner
-versus-
Sarmistha Biswal. …. Opposite Party
CORAM: JUSTICE S.PUJAHARI ORDER 12.07.2022
Order No.
Page 1 of 2
// 2 //
against the petitioner to levy the maintenance ordered. Accordingly, the learned Judge, Family Court, Rourkela vide the impugned order issued the D.W. and N.B.W. against the petitioner. The petitioner challenging the same has come to this Court for quashment of the said on the ground that the opposite party has claimed interim maintenance for the period beyond twelve months.
(S. Pujahari) Judge
MRS
Page 2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a CRLMC filed to quash an order issuing DW and NBW for recovery of interim maintenance is maintainable when the maintenance was limited to twelve months preceding the filing of the petition.
Whether the petitioner’s contention that the opposite party claimed maintenance beyond twelve months provides a valid ground for quashment.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Nirmal Kumar Mallick
Sarmistha Biswal
S. Pujahari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
