Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: hindu adoptions and maintenance act 1956 section 27 maintenance when to be a charge Year: 1962 Page 1 of about 26 results (0.146 seconds)

Jan 30 1962 (HC)

Ram Singh Vs. State and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jan-30-1962

Reported in : AIR1963All355; 1963CriLJ117

..... made a three-pronged attack on the jurisdiction of the magistrate. firstly, he canvassed that a hindu wife was given a right of maintenance under section 18 of the hindu adoptions and maintenance act, 1956, and that right was enforceable in a civil court. the relief of maintenance to a hindu wife, therefore, could not be given by a criminal court. in support of this argument the ..... with an existing prior act thatonly one of the two can remain in force and those whichoccur when an act covers the whole subject of an earlier actand is intended to be a substitute therefor. there is nothingin the hindu adoptions and1 maintenance act to suggest expressly or by necessary implication that the act is intendedto be a substitute for the provisions of section 488 cr. p ..... legally wedded wife of the applicant. she made an application under section 488, cr. p. c., against ram singh claiming a monthly allowance for her maintenance. she founded her application on the allegations that her husband, ram singh had developed illicit intimacy with the wife of her brother and when she objected to it, her husband turned her out of ..... . c. infact the provisions of section 18 of the act cannot be a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 27 1962 (HC)

D.S. Seshadri Vs. Jayalakshmi

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jun-27-1962

Reported in : AIR1963Mad283; (1953)1MLJ11

..... the maintenance act of 1956. we are, however, unable to accept the argument. the right conferred under section 25 of the hindu marriage act is a special right given to an indigent spouse. when an order is passed in a matrimonial cause for maintenance under the hindu law or under the provisions of the hindu adoptions and maintenance act, 1956, it will be in respect of a legal right. section 25 of the hindu marriage act 1955 ..... the petition for judicial separation. there is nothing to indicate as to how she was maintaining herself all these years and why she suddenly felt the need for charging her husband with her maintenance. the lower court has held that the mere fact that the wife deserted her husband without any reasonable cause would not disentitle her to claim alimony. it is ..... time being in force, it must follow that the same interpretation should be adopted with reference to orders passed in any other proceeding taken under the act, for example, under section 24 for maintenance pendente lite proceedings, under section 25 for permanent alimony, under section 26 for the custody of children and under section 27 regarding disposal of property. orders under these provisions undoubtedly affect the rights of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 15 1962 (HC)

Sirigiri Pullaiah Vs. Sirigiri Rushingamma

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-15-1962

Reported in : AIR1963AP323

..... , if he should marry again. this is the effect of the hindu married women's right to separate residence and maintenance act (act 19 of 1946) as also the hindu adoptions and maintenance act, 1956. in fact, in this case, the wife presented a petition for maintenance on the strength of the hindu married women's right to separate residence and maintenance act and we are told that a decree was granted for ..... that will be within two years of alleged desertion. if that were so, the appellant cannot put forward a plea that the wife was not entitled to plead section 18 of the hindu adoptions and maintenance act in bar of the petition for judicial separation or for divorce. even otherwise, we are not satisfied that the contention of the appellant is substantial. it! should be ..... desertion or as to the time of the second marriage. assuming that the desertion took place in or about the year 1948, is there any positive testimony to the date when the appellant took the second wife. while the appellant asserted in the witness-box that he married a second wife five years before, p.w. 5 slated that the appellant ..... that as the appellant had taken a second wife she was entitled to live separately from him and to claim separate maintenance and that the husband could not claim judicial separation on the ground of desertion. she also refuted the charge of immorality.4. the trial court dismissed the petition expressing the opinion that the appellant had not proved either that the .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 03 1962 (HC)

Tulsa W/O Pannalal Koli Vs. Pannalal Natha Koli and anr.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : May-03-1962

Reported in : AIR1963MP5; 1962MPLJ987

..... remarkable that the wording of section 10(1)(b) of the marriage act is the same as that of section 18(2)(b) of the hindu adoptions and maintenance act 1956 (hereinafter called the maintenance act).13. but on a closer examination i find that sub-clause (g) of section 18(2) of the maintenance act enables a hindu wife to live separately from ..... 'without reasonable excuse'. to put it differently, can the court trying the petition under section dismiss it on a ground other than those contained in sections 10, 11, 12 and 13 of the marriage act?12. section 9 reads thus:(1) when either the husband or the wife has, without reasonable excuse, withdrawn from the society ..... not, again, the husband had no right to beat her. the husband cannot be heard to retort that the wife should also bear his irritating idiosyncracacies when he beats her. everyone has certain whims in his ways of life, but no husband has the right, irrespective of the community to which he ..... that her parents prevented her from returning to him but that part has been disbelieved by the trial judge.7. tulsa's statement is that when she was living with her husband he used to beat her and did not give her clothes and proper meals, that she has been residing ..... she would return, with, him in the evening on the same day. he, therefore, left her at her father's house in the morning, but when he went the second time, in the evening,, to fetch her back, her parents started quarrelling with, him and tulsa also abused him, whereupon, he .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 11 1962 (HC)

Kopparthi Satyanarayana Vs. Smt. Kopparti Seetharamamma

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-11-1962

Reported in : AIR1963AP270

..... respondent would be to substitute words which are not in the clause. that the legislature intended to restrict the operation of this section to future marriages could also be seen by contrasting it with the language of section 18, hindu adoptions and maintenance act, sub-section (2) (d) of which reads;'a hindu wife shall be entitled to live separately from her husband without forfeiting her claim to ..... husband he is unable to restrain or perusade the superseded wife to continue cohabitation without stultifying her former position in the house-hold and on the part of the wife when the conduct of the husband towards her is such that in the words of subrahmania lyer j., she cannot live with him consistently with her self-respect and her position ..... the full bench the above cases came for hearing and the following judgment has been pronounced by--)chandra reddy, c.j. 52. appeals nos. 334 of 1955 and 359 of 1956 :- the subject-matter of both these appeals is the same and they relate to the same parties. they are against the judgment of the subordinate judge, narasapur, awarding a ..... it would not have thought of impesing a greater liability for the act done by the husband than he was subject to under the law as obtained at that time, by giving it a retrospective operation.27. reliance was placed by the learned judge as also by the counsel for the respondents on the construction placed by the privy council on the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 01 1962 (HC)

Sundarambal Vs. Suppiah Pillai

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-01-1962

Reported in : AIR1963Mad260; (1963)1MLJ106

..... s. ramachandra iyer, c. j. 1. this appeal raises a question under section 24 of the hindu adoptions and maintenance act 1956. the appellant is the daughter of the respondent through his first wife, whom he discarded in the year 1944. the appellant's mother instituted o. s. no. 70 of 1949 ..... claim. the only provision to which our attention is drawn in this connection, in section 24. but, as we stated earlier, that refers only to claims to be made, whether for past or future maintenance and does not in terms refer to claims made when the party was a hindu, but was subsequently converted to some other religion pending adjudication of the claim. it ..... regard to the nature of the right to maintenance and also the provisions of section 24 referred to above, we are in respectful agreement with that view. but the appellant in the present case was a hindu on the date of the presentation of the plaint. she continued to be so even on the date when the act came into force. therefore, her original right ..... the learned judge on another ground. learned counsel contended that the appellant's claim must be held to have been discharged in view of the fact that, when her mother was decreed to be paid maintenance under the compromise decree referred to earlier, the appellant's claim had also been taken into account. this contention appears to us to be well founded .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 28 1962 (HC)

Gowardhan Sheocharan and ors. Vs. Smt. Gangabai

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-28-1962

Reported in : AIR1964MP168

..... joint family property is of no consequence.6. it was also contended by shri sen that as the present suit was filed after the hindu adoptions and maintenance act, 1956, that act applies to the right of the plaintiff for maintenance. he referred to sections 21 and 22 and pointed out that the liability to maintain a widow is only on the father-in-law. consequently, the defendant ..... that the income from the properties left was about rs. 25,000/- a year out of which she is entitled to maintenance. she brought the present suit for reliefs which have already been stated above.3. the defendants stated that when dauwa died in 1932, there were lands and houses in villages saraipali and mahasamund. the lands in kanharpuri were acquired subsequently ..... court-fees the trial court observed that 'probably she may have no funds to pay this court-fees'. the amount of court-fees payable by the plaintiff is a first charge on the subject-matter of the suit under order 33, rule 10 of the civil procedure code. a clause shall be added in the decree that the amount of court-fees payable ..... , also; but the respondent refused to take that house. in our opinion, all that the widow can ask for is that her residence be provided in the family house; and when a reasonable provision is being mad& for her, she cannot insist upon having a new house constructed for her.15. in the result, both the appeal and the; cross-objection .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 14 1962 (HC)

Udainath Misra Vs. Mst. Chhaya Misrani and ors.

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Mar-14-1962

Reported in : AIR1963Ori27; 28(1962)CLT353

..... and maintenance in certain cases only pertains to grant of maintenance during the pendency of the suits of the nature referred to ..... right to separate residence and maintenance act (19 of 1946) and the civil court had jurisdiction to take cognizance of such a suit. the jurisdiction of the civil court to try suits for maintenance has not been affected in any manner by the hindu adoption and maintenance act (78 of 1955) which came into force on december 21, 1956, section 25 of the hindu marriage act, 1955 providing for permanent alimony ..... not in accordance with the provisions of old law. but all the same the jurisdiction of the courts trying the pending suits by the date when the act came into force would not be affected.mr. acharya cited bootan bai v. durga prasad chaturai, air 1959 madh pra 410; smt. balwanti kunwar v. additional munsiff, dehra dun, air ..... cease to have effect in so far as it is inconsistent with any of the provisions contained in this act. 9. (1) when either the husband or the write has, without reasonable excuse, withdrawn from the society of the other, the aggrieved party may apply, by petition to the district court, for restitution .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 19 1962 (SC)

Raja Muvva Gopalakrishna Yachendra and ors. Vs. Raja V.V. Sarvagna Kri ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-19-1962

Reported in : [1963]Supp2SCR280

..... womb on the notified date including sons, grandsons and great-grandsons adopted before such date (who are hereinafter called 'sharers'); and (b) other persons who, immediately before the notified date, were entitled to maintenance out of the estate and its income either under section 9 or 12 of the madras impartible estates act, 1904, or under any decree or order of a court, award ..... of s. 3 of that act. section 9 of that act mentioned the persons entitled to maintenance out of the impartible estate, where for the purpose of ascertaining the succession to the impartible estate the estate had to be regarded as the property of a joint hindu family. 8. in view of s. 66 of the act the madras impartible estates act of 1904 is deemed to ..... findings is that all the four appeals nos. 116 to 119 of 1961 fail. 27. the dispute in the remaining six civil appeals relates to the principle on which the amounts of maintenance payable to the persons entitled to it are to be calculated. the contention is that when the net income of the estate in 1889 was about rs. 6,00,000 ..... . if the male member died without leaving a natural son or an adopted son, the allowance was to pass the nearest agnates of the same branch according to hindu law and in case he left a wife or wives who had to be paid maintenance, their maintenance would be a liability on such agnate. it was further provided that if any of the three .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 20 1962 (HC)

Gowli Buddanna Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jun-20-1962

Reported in : ILR1962KAR500; [1963]50ITR467(KAR); [1963]50ITR467(Karn)

..... refer the afore-mentioned questions of law to this court for its opinion. 5. under section 3 of the indian income-tax act, the liability to pay tax is charged not only on the income of hindu undivided families. the expression 'hindu undivided family' is not defined in the income-tax act. therefore, in order to understand that expression, we must fall back on the customary ..... us to find out the effect of these observations. as seen from the statement of facts referred to above, the assessee had not only his wife but also had an adoptive mother. he also had a sister. hence this case does not fall within the exception pointed out by the judicial committee even if it is thought that any exception was ..... super-tax commences for an individual. but the same principle would apply, though perhaps to a less extent, to the case of a hindu joint family consisting of one male member and several female members entitled to maintenance, where maintenance might absorb a large share of the family income.'8. the view expressed by beaumont c.j. was fully shared by rangnekar j ..... the expression 'coparcenery' which includes only the males in whom the joint family property is vested. it is argued by the advocate-general that the act, dealing as it does with property, when it refers to a hindu undivided family, really means to denote the coparceners, that is to say, male members of the family in whom the family property is vested. i .....

Tag this Judgment!


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