MRS. K. Vs. MR. V.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A difference having arisen between the views of two learned single judges of this Court in respect of the interpretation to be placed upon the Family Courts Act, 1984, (hereinafter called "the said Act"), the following question has been referred for decision to the Division Bench:

(2.) THE plaintiff has filed the suit against the defendant, her husband, and has sought (a) a declaration that she is entitled to an undivided right, title and interest in the matrimonial home and to reside therein; (b) a declaration that she is entitled to maintenance at the rate of Rs. 17,000/ - per month for herself and the issue of the marriage, a son, over and above certain other facilities; (c) an injunction restraining the defendant from disposing of the matrimonial home, inducting any third person therein and interfering with her right to the use and occupation thereof and (d) an order and decree for maintenance as aforesaid. The plaint avers that the marriage between the plaintiff and the defendant was performed according to Hindu riles and a son was born, who is a minor. The conduct of the defendant is set out and, upon this basis, the aforementioned reliefs have been prayed for.

(3.) WE may at once note that the Division Bench judgment which was followed by Chaudhari, J., namely that in Patrick Martin's case, has been over -ruled by the Full Bench judgment of that Court in Mary Thomas' case.