Allowed

Vaddamanu Sarada Dakshayani v. Vaddamanu Badrinath

Telangana HC6 Apr 2011CRP/1849/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of a civil revision against an order dismissing an execution petition for alleged arrears of maintenance where no specific order directed payment. The court facilitated a settlement for the daughter's education expenses.

What did the court decide?

Respondent directed to deposit Rs.1,00,000 immediately and Rs.4,00,000 in quarterly installments towards daughter's educational expenses.

Vaddamanu Sarada Dakshayani Vs Vaddamanu Badrinath — Maintenance and Alimony | Telangana HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF APRIL, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO

¶5

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1849 OF 2010

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Vaddamanu Sarada Dakshayani and another …PETITIONERS AND Vaddamanu Badrinath …RESPONDENT The Court made the following:

¶8

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO

¶9

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1849 OF 2010

¶10

O R D E R:

¶11

The revision is filed against the order of the lower Court in E.P.No.40 of 2009 in F.C.O.P.No.1556 of 1995 on the file of Family Court, Hyderabad, whereunder the petitioners, who are the wife and daughter of the respondent, filed execution petition directing the respondent for depositing of alleged arrears of maintenance said to have been granted on an interim application before the High Court. The lower Court after considering the application has dismissed the said execution petition. Aggrieved by the said order, the present

¶12

revision is filed.

¶13

2. I have gone through the entire order of the lower Court and also the orders passed by the Division Bench in the connected matter. As rightly found by the lower Court, there is no specific order directing for payment of the maintenance in the earlier proceedings. Therefore, the claim for execution does not arise. However, at the intervention of the Court, the respondent was willing to pay substantial amount to the daughter towards her educational expenditure without prejudice to the contentions of both the parties about the rights of maintenance, marriage expenses etc. Therefore, the Court has satisfied for payment of Rs.5,00,000/- as the educational expenses for the daughter. The respondent has readily agreed and he is willing to give Rs.1,00,000/immediately and to deposit Rs.4,00,000/- in four quarterly instalments. Therefore, in view of the above circumstances, the 2^nd petitioner, who is the daughter, was directed to be present in Court, but she could not present because of examination.

¶14

3. Therefore, the respondent is directed to deposit Rs.1,00,000/to the credit of F.C.O.P.No.1556 of 1995 on the file of Family Court, Hyderabad, within one week and that amount shall be permitted to be withdrawn by the 2^nd petitioner. The other instalments at quarterly rests shall be deposited by the respondent commencing from July, 2011 before 10^th , on such deposit and on application filed by the daughter, the Court shall consider the need and necessity and pass such other orders in the interest of the 2^nd petitioner for her educational expenses after hearing both sides and also keeping the interest of the daughter as paramount of both the parties.

¶15

4. Accordingly, the revision is disposed of. No costs.

¶16

________________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO, J

¶17

Date: 06-04-2011.

¶18

INL

Vaddamanu Sarada Dakshayani v. Vaddamanu Badrinath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vaddamanu Sarada Dakshayani v. Vaddamanu Badrinath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. K. Rohini Naidu Vs B. Ugamraj Nahar

A. Damodar Reddy Vs B. Rukmanamma

New Ashoka Lodge Vs D. Chandra Mohan

St. Xaviers Development Association Vs Smt. Chandrani (Died)

Yarramalla Papa Rao Vs Madhyhnapau Satyavathi

M/S Leonars Company and Another Vs R.Yellaiah Sharma and 4 Others