The respondent has stated in his companynter affidavit in the special leave petition that his income is only Rs.1,000 per month.
The aggrieved appellant has approached this Court of last resort under Article 136 of the Constitution for redressal of her griev ance.
The appellant has stated in her petition for maintenance that the respondent was getting Rs.
From the Judgment and Order dated 27.5.1985 of the Kerala High Court in Crl.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
The appellant then preferred a petition to the High Court under Section 482 of the Code for grant of maintenance to her and for enhancing the maintenance awarded to the child.
211 of 1985.
Case No.
605 of 1986.
C. Birla for the Respondent.
Mrs. Geeta Luthra and D. Goburdhan for the Appellants.
These fundamental questions of a startling nature run as undercurrents beneath the placid waters of this seemingly companymonplace action for maintenance by a Muslim wife against her husband.
Can there be a discrimination between Muslim women falling in the two categories in their right to claim maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for short the Code ?
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by NATARAJAN, J. Is a Muslim wife whose husband has married again worse off under law than a Muslim wife whose husband has taken a mistress to claim maintenance from her husband?
