High CourtsDivision Bench(1926) 03 BOM CK 0013

Hiralal Valavdas vs Bai Amba

Bombay High Court · Decided on 26 March 1926 · Citation: (1926) 28 BOMLR 669

HON’BLE JUDGES
Shah, J · Norman Macleod, J
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Application for Revision No. 100 of 1926

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

2 paragraphs · 129 words

Norman Macleod, Kt., C.J.—This ia an application in revision against the order of a Magistrate increasing the maintenance allowance of the applicant Bai Anaba, u/s 488 of the Criminal Procedure Code, from Rs. 8-4-0 to Rs. 18 per mensem, the order to take effect retrospectively from the date of the application.

2.

It has been argued that the Magistrate had no jurisdiction to make the order. u/s 488, the Magistrate has power to make the maintenance payable from the date of the application, We cannot see why he should not have the same power to direct, if he thinks fit, when an application is made to vary the order as regards the maintenance payable, that maintenance at the increased rate should be paid from the date of the application.