Lack Of Boundaries In Sale Deed Not Fatal To Title If Plot Number & Parent Title Are Sufficiently Identifiable: Calcutta High Court Terror Perception Of Underworld Justifies Delay In Invoking MCOCA; Purely Civil Disputes Can Metamorphose Into Criminal Offence: Bombay High Court Identical Wills Executed By Spouses On Same Day Not Necessarily 'Mutual Wills' Restricting Power Of Alienation: Delhi High Court Written Notice Not Mandatory For Revoking Permission Under Section 41 Presidency Small Cause Courts Act: Gujarat High Court Wife Cannot Maintain Complaint Against Husband Under Senior Citizens Act; Not Intended For Spousal Disputes: Karnataka High Court Mere Presence At Scene Or Facilitation Without Intent To Aid Crime Does Not Amount To Abetment: Delhi High Court Offences Under IT Act Punishable With 3 Years Imprisonment Are Bailable Under Section 77B: Kerala High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail In KCA Data Theft Case Premature Release Can't Be Denied Citing Section 435 CrPC If Sentence Under Central Act Is Already Served: Madras High Court Suppression Of Higher Qualification To Secure Job Reserved For Lower Education Is Foundational Fraud, Sympathy Has No Role: Supreme Court MBBS Admissions | Candidate Using NIOS Marks To Meet 50% Eligibility Cannot Claim State Govt School Quota: Orissa High Court High Court Cannot Exercise Article 227 Power To Strike Off Plaint When Remedy Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC Exists: Madras High Court Section 69 IEA | Onus On Propounder To Lead Secondary Evidence & Remove Suspicious Circumstances If Attesting Witnesses Are Dead: Telangana High Court

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