VAIBHAV SUKRAM CHAUDHARI v. JYOTI SURESH CHAUDHARI
Case at a glance
Outcome
Withdrawn
The family court appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. The family court appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. Civil application is disposed of. [ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.] [ MANGESH S. PATIL, J.] Najeeb.
Judgment
petition the Hon’ble Court be pleased to stay proceeding of Pet A 321/2022 before trial Court. (c) Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash proceeding of Pet A 321/2022 before trial Court. (d) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the Interim Maintenance order dated
17.07.2023. (e) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct trial Court to decide application u/s 340 of Cr.P.C. i.e. Exh 22 of the original petition. 2 934.FCA-85-2023.doc (f) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to reduce interim maintenance amount as per Affidavit of assets of liability. Any other such order that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit.
We have heard appellant in person. When it was indicated that the challenge being put up by him to the order of interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act passed by the Family Court would be an interlocutory order in the light of decision of this Court in the matter of Sunil Hansraj Gupta Vs. Payal Sunil Gupta, 1991 (1) Mh.Lj 737, he seeks leave to withdraw the appeal with liberty to avail of the appropriate remedy as is available to him in law.
Operative part
The family court appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. Civil application is disposed of. [ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.] [ MANGESH S. PATIL, J.] Najeeb.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The family court appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 340; Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — s. 24.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 04 Oct 2023. The bench was SHAILESH P BRAHME, MANGESH S PATIL.
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.