Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

Husband Ordered to Pay Rs. 30 Lakh Per Month in Rent to wife – SC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Apex court observed in a Civil Appeal titled JAIDEV RAJNIKANT SHROFF  VERSUS POONAM JAIDEV SHROFF that granting the prayer and allowing the respondent wife to move into the matrimonial house would be detrimental to the parties' interests rather than beneficial. The record and the status of the criminal proceedings would indicate that the parties' relationships are so strained that allowing them to live together would result in additional criminal proceedings. 

The petition was filed by the appellant husband seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty against his wife. The respondent wife along with their daughter went to 38, Pali Hill, Bandra, i.e., her mother's residence. The husband then filed an application seeking an order of injunction restraining the respondent-wife from entering the said house 

The Family Court granted an injunction preventing the respondent-wife from entering her husband's home. the respondent wife filed a writ petition being Writ Petition No. 6029 of 2016 before the Bombay High Court. Vide order dated 24th October 2016, the High Court allowed the said writ petition filed by the respondent wife. Appellant husband has approached Apex Court.   

Apex Court observed granting the prayer and allowing the respondent wife to move into the matrimonial house would be detrimental to the parties' interests rather than beneficial. The record and the status of the criminal proceedings would indicate that the parties' relationships are so strained that allowing them to live together would result in additional criminal proceedings. 

During pendency of the appeal many properties were offered to wife to choose anyone which is identical to her matrimonial home for residing, but all were rejected by the wife. 

Further observed that stretch the word 'similar' to be totally identical to the said house, would be unrealistic. The conduct of the respondent wife in rejecting all the properties, which have been identified by the Architect, only on the ground that they are not similar, to say the least, is unreasonable. 

Apex Court has rejected the interlocutory applications filed by the respondent and held the husband would be liable to pay rent to the maximum of Rs. 30 lakhs per month. 

D.D-DECEMBER 03, 2021.

JAIDEV RAJNIKANT SHROFF  VERSUS POONAM JAIDEV SHROFF              

Latest Legal News