REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

ANUP KUMAR Appellant

V/S

REENA Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

SWARNA PRAVA TRIPATHY V. DIBYA SINGHA TRIPATHI [REFERRED TO]
RAHUL SAMRAT TANDON VS. SMT. NEERU TANDON [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH CHANDER KAUSHAL VS. VEENA KAUSHAL [REFERRED TO]
MIDNAPORE PEOPLES CO OP BANK LTD VS. CHUNILAL NANDA [REFERRED TO]
KIRAN BALA SRIVASTAVA VS. JAI PRAKASH SRIVASTAVA [REFERRED TO]
RAGHVENDRA SINGH CHOUDHARY VS. SEEMA BAI [REFERRED TO]
SWARNA PRAVA TRIPATHY VS. DIBYASINGHA TRIPATHY [REFERRED TO]
RAJESH SHUKLA VS. MEENA SHUKLA [REFERRED TO]
ARVIND KUMAR JAIN VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
DURGA DEVI VS. VIJAY KUMAR PODDAR [REFERRED TO]
NEELAM KUMARI SINHA VS. SHREE PRASHANT KUMAR [REFERRED TO]
ARUNA CHOUDHARY VS. SUDHAKAR CHOUDHARY [REFERRED TO]
KAVITA VYAS VS. DEEPAK DAVE [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been referred to the Full Bench for decision on the following questions, which are as follows:-

(2.) Before we advert to the issues referred to us, it is briefly noted that the present proceeding arises from the order dtd. 5/12/2018 passed by the First Additional District Judge, Rehli, District Sagar, in H.M No.33/2017 whereby the application filed by the respondent wife under sec. 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, has been allowed and a sum of Rs.7,000.00 has been ordered to be paid to her as maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings.

(3.) The applicant husband, being aggrieved by the order passed by the First Additional District Judge, Rehli, District Sagar has filed Civil Revision No.150/2019 under sec. 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The respondent wife has objected to the maintainability of the Revision on the ground that the order in question is interlocutory in nature and, therefore, no appeal or revision is maintainable against the same.

Click here to view full judgment.

ANUP KUMAR Vs. REENA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address