CRLR No. 120 of 2010 · Uttarakhand High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
The revision is dismissed summarily
Provisions considered
Judgment
Operative part
Shri K.S. Verma, Advocate, present for the revisionist. passed Additional Heard. This revision is directed against order dated 29.05.2010, Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court, V, Dehradun , in criminal appeal no. 3 of 2010 whereby said court has affirmed the order dated 12.01.2010, passed by trial court (Judicial Magistrate, I, Dehradun). The trial court has directed the revisionist to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs. 1,500/- per month to his wife (present respondent), under the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The two courts below after application of mind after considering facts and circumstances, have taken the concurrent view that the revisionist Manoj Ajmani was admittedly husband of the respondent Preeti Ajmani and is liable to pay Rs. 5,000/- per month as maintenance to her. This Court does not find any illegality in the order passed by the courts below. The revision is dismissed summarily. PV (P.C.P., J) 17.06.2010
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The revision is dismissed summarily
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
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.