<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1990 (3) TMI 386 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459431</link>
    <description>Desertion in law requires intentional, permanent abandonment without consent and without reasonable cause; it is not established by mere separation. In maintenance proceedings, a wife may live separately and claim maintenance where the husband&#039;s conduct provides sufficient cause. The Madhya Pradesh High Court noted that the husband&#039;s second marriage, together with the wife&#039;s temporary stay at her parental home to attend to her ailing mother, justified separate residence. The revisional court&#039;s finding of wilful desertion was set aside because it misconstrued the legal test for desertion, and fresh evidence could not be introduced in Section 482 CrPC proceedings. The maintenance award was restored in favour of the wife.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Dec 2024 11:45:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=782562" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (3) TMI 386 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459431</link>
      <description>Desertion in law requires intentional, permanent abandonment without consent and without reasonable cause; it is not established by mere separation. In maintenance proceedings, a wife may live separately and claim maintenance where the husband&#039;s conduct provides sufficient cause. The Madhya Pradesh High Court noted that the husband&#039;s second marriage, together with the wife&#039;s temporary stay at her parental home to attend to her ailing mother, justified separate residence. The revisional court&#039;s finding of wilful desertion was set aside because it misconstrued the legal test for desertion, and fresh evidence could not be introduced in Section 482 CrPC proceedings. The maintenance award was restored in favour of the wife.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459431</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>