The Court disposed of a Family Court petition seeking maintenance because the respondent died, rendering the petition infructuous. The petitioners were advised to pursue their remedy if the cause of action survives.
The RPFAM was disposed of as infructuous.
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 RPFAM NO. 94 OF 2011
Smt. Banalata Dora and another
…. Petitioners
Mr. Tusar Kumar Mishra, Advocate -versus-
S. Simanchalam (T.C.) …. Opp. Party
CORAM:
JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No.
16.02.2023
bks
(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge
Page 1 of 1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a Family Court petition for maintenance becomes infructuous after the death of the respondent.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Banalata Dora
another
S. Simanchalam (T.C.)
K.R. MOHAPATRA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
