Allowed

Malladi Satya Kumar v. Malladi Venkata Naga Sailaja

Telangana HC7 Jul 2011CRLRC/383/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court made the interim maintenance order, directing the petitioner to pay Rs.3000/- per month, absolute. The Court held that since evidence recording in the main maintenance case is ongoing, it is not just or prudent to adjudicate the merits at this stage.

What did the court decide?

The interim order directing the petitioner to pay Rs.3000/- per month maintenance is made absolute.

Malladi Satya Kumar Vs Malladi Venkata Naga Sailaja — Maintenance and Alimony | Telangana HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH : HYDERABAD

¶2

THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH (7^TH ) DAY OF JULY, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN

¶3

Present:

¶4

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY

¶5

Criminal Revision Case No.383 of 2011

¶6

Between:

¶7

Malladi Satya Kumar

¶8

…Petitioner

¶9

And:

¶10

Malladi Venkata Naga Sailaja & 2 others

¶11

… Respondents

¶12

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY

¶13

Crl.R.C.No.383 of 2011

¶14

ORDER:

¶15

This revision case is directed against the order dated 21.01.2011 in Crl.M.P.No.883 of 2010 in MC No.28 of 2010 on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Ongole, wherein, the said petition filed by the respondents 1 and 2 herein, for grant of interim maintenance was allowed in part granting interim maintenance of Rs.3000/- per month to the first respondent and Rs.2500/- per month to the 2^nd respondent herein, pending disposal of the main M.C. No.28 of 2010.

¶16

2. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner. None appears for the respondents 1 and 2, though served with notice. Perused the record.

¶17

3. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the enquiry in the main case has been taken up and recording of

¶18

evidence is in progress. He further stated that the interim order granted by this Court on 22.02.2011 directing the petitioner to deposit arrears of maintenance at the rate of Rs.3000/- per month and continuing to pay at the same rate before 10^th of every succeeding month, is being regularly complied with.

¶19

4. In the circumstances, having regard to the fact that recording of evidence in the main case is in progress, it is considered neither just nor prudent to go in to the merits of the case at this stage. Hence, the interim order dated 22.02.2011 directing the petitioner to pay interim maintenance of Rs.3000/- per month towards maintenance, on or before 10^th of every succeeding month, is made absolute and the petitioner is directed to pay the same accordingly till the disposal of the main MC No.28 of 2010. It is open to the learned Judge, Family Court, Ongole, to dispose of the main case in accordance with law, without in any way being influenced by the interim order passed by this Court, which is now made absolute.

¶20

5. In the result, the criminal revision case is disposed of accordingly.

¶21

__________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J

¶22

Date: 07.07.2011 bss

Malladi Satya Kumar v. Malladi Venkata Naga Sailaja

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Malladi Satya Kumar v. Malladi Venkata Naga Sailaja

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sarabu Venkata Subbamma, Vs Addepalli Chenchu Ratnamma

Allam Naraiah, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Farooq Ahmed Vs Mohd. Quader

State Bank of India, Yellareddyguda, Vs M. Ganga Raju

Ameti Naveen Kumar Vs Ameti Chandraiah

Perikala Velangini Kumar, Vs Perikala Satya Priaya