Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: family courts act Page 1 of about 254,522 results (0.520 seconds)

Sep 03 1998 (HC)

Sumithra Devi Vs. G. Venkateshan

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : (1999)155CTR(Kar)40; II(1999)DMC655

..... a reading of section 19 clearly reveals that no revision is maintainable from the order of family court, allowing the amendment of plaint.5. thus having considered the matter in the light of section 19 of family courts act as well as keeping in view article 227,1 find that there is no good ground ..... for the respondent.2. this civil revision under section 115 of c.p.c. has been preferred by the respondent before the appellate court from the order of the family court dated 18.4.1994 allowing the amendment of the petition for divorce in which in alternative the petitioner has sought a decree for ..... period of 30 days from the date of the judgment or order of a family court.(4) the high court may, of its own motion or otherwise, call for and ..... that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to any appeal pending before a high court or any order passed under chapter ix of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) before the commencement of the family courts (amendment) act, 1991. and(3) every appeal under this section shall be preferred within a ..... examine the record of any proceeding in which the family court situated .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 19 2001 (HC)

A. Mannan Khan Vs. Judge and Family Court, Hyd., A.P. and Another

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2001(2)ALD190; 2001(1)ALT607; II(2001)DMC250

..... court or any subordinate civil court under any law for the time being in force in respect of suits and proceedings of ..... status of the 2nd respondent is ex-wife and as such, only common law court has got jurisdiction and that the family court has got no jurisdiction. he draws our attention to explanation to section 7 of the family courts act, 1984, which reads:'jurisdiction :--(1) subject to the other provisions of this act, a family courtshall- (a) have and exercise all the jurisdiction exercisable by any district ..... se the parties, each party is claiming that it has got title and possession in the property in question.4. mr. mohd. zia-ul-haque, further submits that the family court had erred in entertaining the said suit for the reason that the moment there was a dissolution of marriage between the parties, there was a severance of matrimonial relationship of ..... , j. 1. this revision under article 227 of the constitution of india raises a jurisdictional point regarding the maintainability of os no.100 of 1997 on the file of the family court, hyderabad.2. mr. mohd. zia-ul-haque, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was the husband of the 2nd respondent, but the marriage between them .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 03 2006 (HC)

Sri N. Narasimhiah S/O Late Sri Narasimhiah Vs. Smt. B.S. Vimala D/O S ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR2007Kant39

..... disputed the marriage and on such premise prayed for further relief and further had raised a preliminary objection; that the suits were not maintainable under section 7 of the family courts act and this issue having been answered in favour of the plaintiffs in terms of the impugned order passed in common in the two suits, the two writ petitions are ..... exercise all the jurisdiction exercisable by any district court or any subordinate civil court, under any law for the time being in force in respect of ..... courts, other than family court and as the suit is) filed before the family court, it was not tenable and on such premise the family court should have issued an appropriate order/direction and as the family court has failed to do so, these writ petitions are filed.7. in this regard learned counsel for the petitioners have drawn my attention to the provisions of section 7 of the family courts act ..... , 1984. section 7 reads as under :7. jurisdiction (1) subject to the other provisions of this act, a family court shall -(a) have and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 11 2000 (HC)

Piyush Kumar Rastogi Vs. Smt. Archana Varshney Alias Vasudha

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : 2000(4)AWC3171; I(2001)DMC36

..... the learned counsel of the appellant, suffice it to say that section 13 of the family courts act. 1984, unequivocally declares that no party to a suit or proceeding before a family court shall be entitled, as of right, to be represented by a legal practitioner. section authorises the family court to seek the assistance of a legal expert as amicus curiae, if it considers it ..... sinha, j.1. instant appeal, under section 19 of the family courts act. 1984, is directed against the judgment dated january 18, 2000, rendered by the principal judge. family court. moradabad, in family court suit no. 37 of 1998, instituted by smt. archana varshney alias vasudha, the respondent herein, under section 13 of the hindu marriage act, 1955, whereby the decree of divorce against the appellant has ..... to the effect that the plea of the respondent regarding desertion and cruelty was fully established, the family court had no choice except to allow the petition for divorce instituted by the respondent and grant her decree of divorce prayed for.7. all told, the appeal lacks merit ..... her. it is also not in dispute that the appellant failed to produce any evidence in rebuttal or otherwise. in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, the family court accepted the testimony of the respondent and arrived at a conclusion that the plea of cruelty and desertion raised by the respondent was fully established. having arrived at a finding .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 30 2000 (HC)

Kailash Bhansali (Smt.) Vs. Surendra Kumar

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 2000(3)WLN387

..... the respondent husband filed an application under sec. 13 (i) (a) (ii) of the hindu marriage act before the family court, udaipur stating that his wife failed to comply with the decree passed by the family court regarding restitution of conjugal right, therefore, decree of divorce be passed in his favour. there is no pleading in this case to ..... by the then judge of family court (annex.2). instead of complying with the orders at annex. 1 ..... and 2 passed by the family court, udaipur, only with a view to harass the petitioner, ..... earlier filed an application for divorce before the family court, udaipur seeking divorce from his wife-present petitioner, which was dismissed on 30.3.95 by the then judge of family court. thereafter, the petitioner wife filed application u/s: 9 of the hindu marriage act for restitution of conjugal right against her husband before the family court, udaipur which was allowed on 26.10.1996 .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 11 1992 (HC)

Madulal Vs. Sarojini Devi

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : II(1992)DMC400; 1992WLN(UC)506

..... by shri gandevia, learned counsel that the income of the appellant is rs. 3,000/- per month. it is also submitted that no appeal lies under section 19 of the family courts act, 1984, since the impugned order is an interlocutory order. it is also denied that the respondent has sufficient income to look after herself.4. we have heard both the parties ..... . a bare reading of sub-section (1) of section 19 of the family courts act, 1984 shows that no appeal lies against an interlocutory order passed by a family court. admittedly, the interim order has been passed for monthly maintenance till the final decision of the appeal. the appeal is, therefore, liable to ..... , even on merits, we do not find any force in the contention raised as the matter is yet to be decided on evidence produced by both the parties in the family court. the appeal is therefore, dismissed.5. we deem it appropriate, as prayed by learned counsel for the appellant, that the matter should be disposed of at an early date. shri ..... shri mishra, learned counsel for the appellant that interim maintenance of rs. 200/- has been granted under proceedings of section 125 cr.p.c, which are still pending before the family court at ajmer. it is submitted that petitioner has income of rs. 1,000/- per month it is submitted that the respondent has deserted the appellant since , last 26 years subsequently .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 01 2005 (HC)

Mrs. Rajashree Alias Vanita Rajesh Dixit Vs. Shri. Rajesh Nagesh Dixit

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR2005Bom352; 2005(4)ALLMR63; 2006(2)BomCR416; II(2005)DMC824

..... suspend the order of interim maintenance if the changed circumstances so warranted so as to do justice to the parties. 6. section 10 of the family courts act, 1984 states inter alia that 'the provisions of the code of civil procedure and of any other law for the time being in force shall ..... the notice or thereabout, the wife filed p.a. no. 640 of 2002 under section 9 of the act for restitution of conjugal rights on or about 27.9.2002 before the family court at pune. in the said petition, she filed an application exhibit-5 for interim alimony. by an order dated ..... the provisions of the code of criminal procedure or the rules made thereunder, shall apply to the proceedings under chapter ix of the code before a family court'. chapter ix of the code of criminal procedure 1973 is regarding the orders for maintenance of wife, children and parents and it contains sections 125 ..... learned counsel for the wife submitted that under order xlvii rule 9 of c.p.c., second review application was not maintainable and therefore, the family court entertained the application at exh.50 without authority in law. once the application at exh.40 praying for review though rejected by the order dated 7 ..... filed by the respective spouses as well as the application filed under section 24 of the act filed by the wife. consequently, under order xlvii rule 1 and section 144 of the civil procedure code, the family court has power to entertain an application for review. such an application was filed at exhibit 40 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 16 2002 (HC)

Ajit Bhagwandas Udeshi Vs. Smt. Kumud Ajit Udeshi

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR2003Bom120; 2003(1)ALLMR9; 2003(3)BomCR224; I(2003)DMC602

..... to the grant of residential premises (i.e. shelter) to the wife has preferred this appeal under the provisions of the family courts act ('act' for short). thus the issue involved in this appeal is very limited one as to whether the family court was justified in granting shelter to respondent (wife). the case sought to be made out by the respondent (wife) in the ..... have been paid by the respondent (wife) out of the amount received by her from the landlord of the kesar building. under these circumstances, the findings recorded by the family court and the shelter awarded to the respondent (wife) cannot be faulted with. the appellant (husband) is not occupying the said accommodation though he has maintained his possession over the ..... with the emergence of this new relationship; he started insisting for divorce which was refused by the respondent (wife). her refusal, ultimately, resulted in initiation of matrimonial litigation in the family court atmumbai. the appellant (husband) started living separately but did not vacate mezzanine portion of the block. however, the respondent (wife) continued to occupy the ground floor of the said ..... also pleased to allow permanent alimony at the rate of rs. 1,000/- per month from 29th february, 1996. in addition to the said amount of permanent alimony, the family court was also pleased to grant shelter. in other words, the residential premises which the respondent was occupying at the time of initiation of matrimonial dispute and decision thereof; was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 30 2008 (HC)

Rakhi W/O Santhosh Deorankar Vs. Jayendra S/O Sadashiorao Deorankar

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2008(4)ALLMR851; 2008(5)MhLj98

..... relationship separable or liable to be dissolved or rights enforceable in law; and more particularly relatable to clauses (a), (b), (c), (f) and (g) of explanation to section 7 of family courts act, 1984. these clauses are illustrative as well as restrictive. clause (c) and (d) of explanation will have to be read by applying the rule of 'ejusdem generis' and not to ..... view of spectrum of interpretation as laid down in case of s.r. batra v. taruna batra (supra) in which case hon'ble supreme court has devised a 'scope' of construction for all courts in india.27. the family courts act which is a special legislation and creates a forum and mechanism for beneficial and effective enforcement of existing rights. this statute cannot be construed ..... peaceful and anxious consideration to the questions involved. the question revolves around clauses (c) and (d) of explanation to section 7 of family courts act, 1984.20. clauses (c) and (d) of explanation to section 7 of said act read as follows:(c) a suit or proceeding between the parties to a marriage with respect to the property of the parties or of ..... include 'one and all related'. section 7 of family courts act cannot be read on par with section 9 of the civil procedure code. jurisdiction of family court will therefore, be one assorted for it, and not everything under sun which is triable by civil court or district court even remotely related to matrimony.26. the construction of restrictive nature as discussed in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 23 2007 (HC)

Smt. M.V. Rajamma Vs. Suresh Vadakannavar

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR2008Kant41; 2008(1)KarLJ175

..... that order and to get a better maintenance from the respondent, the petitioner preferred a miscellaneous first appeal under section 19 of the family courts act, but being unable to pay the court fee of rs. 2,400/- payable on such an appeal, the petitioner has filed this civil petition praying for permission to prosecute ..... objections in a matter of this nature. it is rather puzzling and unfortunate that in appeals under section 19 of the family courts act 1987 which provision is invoked by a wife who has either been denied maintenance or maintenance awarded is meagre, she is made to pay ..... the petitioner and sri sanjeev kumar patil, learned counsel for the respondent.5. no more material of evidence is required to be placed before the court to reach the conclusion that the petitioner is an indigent person. petitioner, a wife who has been driven out of the matrimonial house and who is ..... court fee on ad valorem basis under article 1 of schedule i to the karnataka court fees and suits valuation act, 1958. sri manmohan, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no other provisions which ..... can be invoked by the petitioner to get over the hardship of being compelled to pay a hefty court fee.7. while this may be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //