RAM UDGAR DAS v. SMT.CHINTA DEVI
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Family Courts Act, 1984 s. 19(4)
Judgment
The counsel for the appellant is, accordingly, permitted to make necessary correction in course of the day. Since the appeal had been filed within the prescribed period of limitation, the question of limitation would not arise. Let it be listed before an appropriate Court for admission after necessary correction is made. ( P.K. Misra, CJ.) (Anjana Prakash, J.) Neyaz/
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.
This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record.
Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on
Patna High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. JUDICATURE AT PATNA FA No. 45 of 2009).
← Search more judgments