Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Veena Devi Vs. Arun Kumar Singh

Veena Devi vs Arun Kumar Singh

Disposition Petition dismissed Court Jharkhand Decided Mar 28, 2007
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/520140

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Jharkhand High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Family
Disposition
Petition dismissed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. Articles 12 & 226: [M. Karpaga Vinayagam, C.J., Narendra Nath Tiwari & D.P.Singh, JJ] Writ petition - Maintainability - Whether State Co-operative Milk Producers Federation Ltd., is a State within meaning of Article 12 ? - Held, From perusal of relevant Rules of byelaws, it is clear that St...

Key legal issue
Family
Outcome / disposition
Petition dismissed

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Veena Devi

Respondent

Arun Kumar Singh

Legal References

Reported In
[2008(1)JCR125(Jhr)]

Excerpt

- constitution of india. articles 12 & 226: [m. karpaga vinayagam, c.j., narendra nath tiwari & d.p.singh, jj] writ petition - maintainability - whether state co-operative milk producers federation ltd., is a state within meaning of article 12 ? - held, from perusal of relevant rules of byelaws, it is clear that state government has no role to play either in policy decision for raising funds for federation or its expenditure and thus have no financial control. further there is nothing to indicate that government has any functional and administrative control over federation. state government has no role to play in matter of appointment of any of officials of federation including managing director. federation is totally independent in all respects and in no way subservient to state government in conduct of its business. federation in no way can be termed as agency of state government and does not come within meaning of article 12 of constitution. writ petitions against federation is not maintainable. ordern.n. tiwari, j.1. in this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for enhancement of the maintenance amount from rs. 1,500/- to rs. 3,500/- per month. it has been stated that the learned court below has allowed the amount of maintenance on an application under section 24 of the hindu marriage act only to the extent of rs. 1,500/- per month and rs. 5,000/- as litigation expenses. it has been slated that the said maintenance amount is not sufficient for the petitioner and that it should be enhanced to rs. 3,500/-.2. learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submitted that the learned court below has considered all aspects and also considered that the petitioner was receiving only rs. 7,050/- and has come to the conclusion and fixed maintenance amount of rs. 1,500/- and also directed to pay litigation expenses of rs. 5,000/-. learned counsel submitted that since the date of the order, he has been depositing the said amount and he has also deposited the amount of litigation expenses of rs. 5,000/-. it has been submitted that the petitioner has got residential accommodation in prabhat colony, chas and she has been using and enjoying the said property. it has been further submitted that the respondent is c heart patient and he requires considerable sum for his treatment and taking into consideration all the materials on record, the learned court below has fixed the said amount of maintenance.3. after hearing the parties and considering their submissions as also the materials appearing on record, i find that the learned court below, after taking into consideration the petitioner's income and other aspects, has fixed the said amount of maintenance of rs. 1,500/- per month. the petitioner has not brought anything on record to show any change in the income of the respondent and, as such, i find no ground to interfere with the impugned order for enhancement of the said amount of maintenance. this writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

Full Judgment

ORDER

N.N. Tiwari, J.

1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for enhancement of the maintenance amount from Rs. 1,500/- to Rs. 3,500/- per month. It has been stated that the learned Court below has allowed the amount of maintenance on an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act only to the extent of Rs. 1,500/- per month and Rs. 5,000/- as litigation expenses. It has been slated that the said maintenance amount is not sufficient for the petitioner and that it should be enhanced to Rs. 3,500/-.

2. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submitted that the learned Court below has considered all aspects and also considered that the petitioner was receiving only Rs. 7,050/- and has come to the conclusion and fixed maintenance amount of Rs. 1,500/- and also directed to pay litigation expenses of Rs. 5,000/-. Learned Counsel submitted that since the date of the order, he has been depositing the said amount and he has also deposited the amount of litigation expenses of Rs. 5,000/-. It has been submitted that the petitioner has got residential accommodation in Prabhat Colony, Chas and she has been using and enjoying the said property. It has been further submitted that the respondent is c heart patient and he requires considerable sum for his treatment and taking into consideration all the materials on record, the learned Court below has fixed the said amount of maintenance.

3. After hearing the parties and considering their submissions as also the materials appearing on record, I find that the learned Court below, after taking into consideration the petitioner's income and other aspects, has fixed the said amount of maintenance of Rs. 1,500/- per month. The petitioner has not brought anything on record to show any change in the income of the respondent and, as such, I find no ground to Interfere with the impugned order for enhancement of the said amount of maintenance. This writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial