✦ Bombay High Court · 13 Jan 2006

Mr.Allwyn Valerian Saldanha v. Mrs.Leena @ Roshni Allwyn Saldanha

Civil Reference No. 14 of 2001R M LODHA, LODHA, SATHE, S R SATHE, V MOHTA, ANOOP V MOHTA, ANOOP

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Key paragraphs

  • Para 33. Reference is disposed of accordingly. LODHA, J.) (R.M. LODHA, J.) (R.M. LODHA, J.) (R.M. SATHE, J.) (S.R. SATHE, J.) (S.R. SATHE, J.) (S.R. V. MOHTA, J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) (ANOOP

Judgment

None for the parties. P.C. CORAM : R.M.LODHA, S.R.SATHE & ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. DATED : 13th January, 2006 None appears petitioner. Mr.M.S.Karnik, advocate appears for the respondent.

2.

In decision Reference No.1 1998, Asis Ubaldo Rodrigues Civil v. Maria 2000, Asis Rodrigues, reference Family Court No.1, Pune uncalled unnecessary. The decree 23rd June, passed Family Court No.3, Pune be treated as a final decree subject to appeal under section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984.

3.

Reference is disposed of accordingly. LODHA, J.) (R.M. LODHA, J.) (R.M. LODHA, J.) (R.M. SATHE, J.) (S.R. SATHE, J.) (S.R. SATHE, J.) (S.R. V. MOHTA, J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) (ANOOP

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Family Courts Act, 1984 — s. 19.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Bombay High Court, on 13 Jan 2006. The bench was R M LODHA, LODHA, SATHE, S R SATHE, V MOHTA, ANOOP V MOHTA, ANOOP.

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.

Why is this linked?

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 Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Civil Reference No. 14 of 2001). ← Search more judgments