Madhya Pradesh Court October 1990 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Ansuiya Bai W/O Hawaslal Vs. Hawaslal S/O Tulsiram
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-1990
Reported in: 1991(0)MPLJ436
ORDERK.L. Issrani, J.1. This is a revision petition by the wife against the order dated 21-3-1984, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Balaghat, in Criminal Revision No. 57 of 1983, by which the order dated 1-9-1983, passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Waraseoni, in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 38 of 1981, granting maintenance Under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been reversed.2. Admittedly, the applicant is the legally wedded wife of the non-applicant. On 15-5-1981, the non-applicant contracted second marriage and the applicant is living separately with her parents.3. The case of the applicant is that after the second marriage of the non-applicant, he started treating the applicant with cruelty. A son was also born to the non-applicant out of the wedlock of the second marriage. The cruelty became unbearable. Her father had to get her custody through a search warrant from Court. As such, she was compelled to leave the house of the non-applicant and...
Mst. Ansuiya Bai Vs. Nawaslal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ2959
ORDERK.L. Issrani, J.1. This is a revision petition by the wife against the order dated 21-3-1984, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Balaghat, in Criminal Revision No. 57 of 1983, by which the order dated 1-9-1983, passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Waraseoni, in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 38 of 1981, granting maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been reversed.2. Admittedly, the applicant is the legally wedded wife of the non-applicant. On 15-5-1981, the non-applicant contracted second marriage and the applicant is living separately with her parents.3. The case of the applicant is that after the second marriage of the non-applicant, he started treating the applicant with cruelty. A son was also born to the non-applicant out of the wedlock of the second marriage. The cruelty became unbearable. Her father had to get her custody through a search warrant from Court. As such, she was compelled to leave the house of the non-applicant and...
Ramesh Dutt S/O Bhogiram Sharma Vs. Dev S/O Bhogiram Sharma and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-04-1990
Reported in: 1991(0)MPLJ18
ORDERR.C. Lahoti, J.1. Law as to amendment of pleadings contained in Rule 17 of Order 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been subject-matter of discussion in umpteen number of cases. The general principles are so well settled by the law laid down by the Apex Court, also illuminated in several decisions of this Court, as hardly need to be reviewed and restated. For principles see - Ganesh Trading Co. v. Moti Ram, AIR 1978 SC 484; Jai Jai Ram Manohar Lal v. National Building Material Supply, AIR 1969 SC 1267; L. J. Leach and Co. Ltd. and Anr. v. Messrs Jardine Skinner and Co., AIR 1957 SC 357 and P. H. Patil v. Kalgonda Shequonda Patil and Ors., AIR 1957 SC 363. Nevertheless, the difficulty faced by subordinate Courts while dealing with an application seeking an amendment resultinng in withdrawal of admission contained in the pleadings can be understood. The present one is such a case.2. A bare reading of Rule 17 shows that once the Court has formed an opinion that the amendment ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›