Patna Court March 1998 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.
Sadhana Devi Vs. Bijendra Kumar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-03-1998
1. This Civil Revision application is directed against the order dated 23-7-1996 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court. Patna, in Matrimonial Case No. 46 of 1995, whereby and whereunder the Court below rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act' for short) claiming alimony pendente lite for her maintenance and for the maintenance of minor son. The plaintiff-opposite party filed Matrimonial Case No. 46 of 1995 against the petitioner for a decree for restitution of conjugal rights and for a direction to the petitioner to return to her matrimonial home and on failure of the petitioner, the marriage may be dissolved by a decree of divorce. 2. The suit was contested by the petitioner by filing written statement stating, inter alia, that she is willing to live with her husband provided proper security is given to her as she was ill-treated by the plaintiff-opposite party and his parents, while...
Gopi Lal Poddar Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-02-1998
1. Heard the learned counsels for the parties.2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the entire criminal prosecution including the order taking cognizance dated 9-8-1991 under section 276DD of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in Complaint Case No. 308 of 1991 appertaining to T.R. No. 3007 of' 199 1.3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had filed Money Suit No. 20 of 1984 against Shri S.K. Choubey, the then Income Tax Officer, Darbhanga, and, on the basis of the statement made in the case by the petitioner showing certain deposits in the credit of the petitioner, the present prosecution has been launched against him for violation of section 269SS punishable under section 276131) of the Act, The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that there was no material before the complainant to launch criminal prosecution against the petitioner alleging therein that the petitioner had contravened the provision of section 26...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›