Imp Judgements to fight No - maintainence case

=========================================

1.All maintenance laws are made before legaislation on the female
copercenary rightwas legislated in 2005.Hence, the maintenanance
laws need a fresh look. The judges dismiss such plea with the
proposition that the inherited property is not yeilding income. Now
the question is-Should a person be rewarded for not utilising a
property?

2. Please compile the rulings in the following judgments
Citations.
1. Bhagwan Dutt Vs.Kamala Devi,AIR1975SC83
2. Deb Narayan Halder Vs.Smt.Anshree Halder,2003( 4)Crimes74( SC)
3. Bheekha Ram Vs. Goma Devi, !999 CRI.L.J.1789
4. Hansubai Vs. Balakrishna, 1981CriLJ110
5. Teja Singh Vs.Chhoto,1981 CriLJ1467
6. Ila Vipin Pandya Vs.Smita Ambalal Patel, AIR 2000 Bombay 345
7. Nirmala Devi Vs. Ved Praksh AIR 1993 Himachal Pradesh 1

8. Savitri Pandey Vs. Prem Chandra Pandey, ((2002) 2 SCC 73

9. Rathina Marie Prem Vs. Marcel Fernandes, 1997 CRI..L.J 2524
10. Kum.L.Usharani and othersVs. D.S.Lkshmaiah, 1993 CRI.L.J.982
11. Partha Pratim Basak Vs. Arundhati Basak, C.R.R.No.1653 of
2006, High Court of Calcutta
12.CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 6534-6536 of 1995

PETITIONER:
ADHYATMA BHATTAR ALWAR
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
ADHYATMA BHATTAR SRI DEVI
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 06/11/2001
BENCH:
D.P. Mohapatra & Doraiswamy Raju
(Supreme Court)

3. See the Neeraj aggarwal's case
i)unclean hands-not entitled
ii)Qualified idle-not entitled.

==============================================

-------------------------------------------
Refer my HC PETITION too, its posted on
http://mynation.net/abio/

check refered other judgements too

There are judgements of Punjab &Haryana High Court whwich have set aside such complaints stating that the complaints are vague and general because they do not contain exact details of time,date, effect of torture and who committed the same;misappropriati on of dowry articles,which item was entrusted to whom?If details of judgements required, let me know.

Here are the judgements of PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT that might help;
1.Criminal Misc. No 2126 of 1989 Decided on 7-2 -1991,Harbans Lal and ors VS State of Punjab.

2. Criminal Misc No10381-M of1991 Decided on 18.12.1998,Anil Kumar VS Rita Kumari.

3.Criminal Misc No 3641-M of 1990 Decided on 8-4-1991,Smt. Hukami Devi and Ors VS The State of Haryana and anr. (IMPORTANT JUDGEMENT).

4.Criminal Misc No 2304-M of 1991 Decided on 2-2-1993,Gurdev Singh VS Smt Nachhattar Kaur alias Mandip Kaur.

5.Criminal Misc No 12577-M of 1991 Decide On 19-8-1992,Gurmeet Singh and Ors VS State Of Haryana and anr.

6.Criminal Misc No 8021(Petition No NOT legible,pls CHECK)-M of 1990 Decided on 12-4-1991,Angrez Singh and ors VS State of Punjab and ors.

THE ABOVE JUDGEMENTS GENERALLY STATE THAT:

1. IN ABSENCE OF THE DETAILS OF WHICH ITEMS OF DOWRY WERE ENTRUSTED TO WHICH OF THE ACCUSED,IPC 406,MAY NOT BE APPLICABLE;

2.DETAILS OF DATE&TIME OF THE TORTUROUS ACT AND WHAT EFFECT IT CAUSED ARE REQUIRED FOR APPLICABILITY OF IPC 498A.

Supreme Court Judgement, Civil Appeal No 5803 of 1997(arising out of SLP(C)No. 396 of 1997 ) Decide on 27.8.1997,Smt Jasbir Kaur Sehgal Vs District Judge Dehradun and others,HAS LEVIED A MAINTAINENCE OF Rs 5000/- PER MONTH TO THE WIFE ON AN ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME OF Rs two lacs forty thousand OF THE HUSBAND;You may ask the court, if applicable to levy the maintainence proportionately as per you income;