It is currently Thu Apr 17, 2014 4:00 pm



Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
HMA 24 review dismissed. Story: A Greedy 498-a wife 
Author Message

Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 1:44 pm
Posts: 5419
Location: Delhi (India)
Hi Friends,

It gives me immense pleasure to inform my fellow victims that the review of HMA 24 filed by my lovely 498-A wife has been dismissed.

In brief:

My lovely 498-A wife had filed for HMA 24 in Section 9, HMA application filed by me, section 9 HMA was filed before my case started. The case kept on lingering in SC for transfer and was ultimately transfered to her district.

They filed an application under HMA 24 for 35K pm maintenance and some 1 Lakh in litigation expenses. But they failed to turn up after filing this application and I withdrew the case.

They filed a review seeking a relief that the application of HMA 24 be decided even after withdrawal of the main suit. And the same has been dismissed by Hon'ble Court.

In between she has also filed for divorce and as long as her review was pending, she could not have filed HMA 24 in her divorce suit. Hence, she also lost, maintenance, if any, in divorce suit for SIX MONTHS too.

Regards,

Shonee Kapoor

I have just adapted the story from Panchtantra as per this episode, hope you would like it.

A Greedy 498-A Wife

Once there was a lovely 498-a wife. She and her family was very greedy. There were many times that they had to pay for their greed. Each time they promised themselves, “We have learnt our lesson. Now we will never be greedy again.” But they soon forgot their lessons and were as greedy as ever.

After her DV was dismissed without any relief to her, they were looking for some opportunity to milk the hapless husband.

Suddenly a long pending case of section 9 was transfered to their district. “Ah, we are in luck. This looks another opportunity to get some money,” they said.

Without wasting any time, the lovely 498-a wife filed for 24 HMA, but when the date for her evidence came, she choose to remain absent in court. The husband withdrew the section 9 of HMA.

As per their nefarious plans to make husband come to their city time and again they file for section 13 (1) (ia)

“How nice it would be to have lost maintenance of HMA 24 after withdrawal of the case, coming back to us. Then, we will file another HMA 24 in Divorce case and have two incomes.” and for the greed they also filed the review of section 9 withdrawn by her husband.

The hapless husband, knowing some law, protracted the review for some six months before the said review was dismissed. And thus the lovely 498-a wife lost maintenance, if any, of around six months during HMA 13 as well.

Moral of the Story: Greed is a curse.


Tue Jul 13, 2010 11:28 am
Profile YIM

Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 3:32 pm
Posts: 128
congrats shonee....everyone here should admit and acknowledge that you are the gr8 asset to this movement.

as i have been seeing over the forum for quite sometime ,i still wonder why ur wife wanted to mess with marriage and has chosen "legal terrorism approach" to torture you and get divorce when you are such admirable ,decent nd intellectual.

_________________
-----498A Girl is either a sign of an ultimately clueless person with enormous psychological issues or a very rational person who wants to harm you real bad----------------

**********SatyaMev Jayate - Let the truth Prevail***************


Tue Jul 13, 2010 2:13 pm
Profile

Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 12:52 pm
Posts: 32
Location: Delhi
shoneek wrote:
Hi Friends,

It gives me immense pleasure to inform my fellow victims that the review of HMA 24 filed by my lovely 498-A wife has been dismissed.

In brief:

My lovely 498-A wife had filed for HMA 24 in Section 9, HMA application filed by me, section 9 HMA was filed before my case started. The case kept on lingering in SC for transfer and was ultimately transfered to her district.

They filed an application under HMA 24 for 35K pm maintenance and some 1 Lakh in litigation expenses. But they failed to turn up after filing this application and I withdrew the case.

They filed a review seeking a relief that the application of HMA 24 be decided even after withdrawal of the main suit. And the same has been dismissed by Hon'ble Court.

In between she has also filed for divorce and as long as her review was pending, she could not have filed HMA 24 in her divorce suit. Hence, she also lost, maintenance, if any, in divorce suit for SIX MONTHS too.

Regards,

Shonee Kapoor

I have just adapted the story from Panchtantra as per this episode, hope you would like it.

A Greedy 498-A Wife

Once there was a lovely 498-a wife. She and her family was very greedy. There were many times that they had to pay for their greed. Each time they promised themselves, “We have learnt our lesson. Now we will never be greedy again.” But they soon forgot their lessons and were as greedy as ever.

After her DV was dismissed without any relief to her, they were looking for some opportunity to milk the hapless husband.

Suddenly a long pending case of section 9 was transfered to their district. “Ah, we are in luck. This looks another opportunity to get some money,” they said.

Without wasting any time, the lovely 498-a wife filed for 24 HMA, but when the date for her evidence came, she choose to remain absent in court. The husband withdrew the section 9 of HMA.

As per their nefarious plans to make husband come to their city time and again they file for section 13 (1) (ia)

“How nice it would be to have lost maintenance of HMA 24 after withdrawal of the case, coming back to us. Then, we will file another HMA 24 in Divorce case and have two incomes.” and for the greed they also filed the review of section 9 withdrawn by her husband.

The hapless husband, knowing some law, protracted the review for some six months before the said review was dismissed. And thus the lovely 498-a wife lost maintenance, if any, of around six months during HMA 13 as well.

Moral of the Story: Greed is a curse.


Hey Soneek I dont understand why did u go for section 9 of H.M.Act.Wherever and whenever a husband goes for section 9 immediately wife goes for maintenance.Section 9 only opens a door for the wife to claim maintenance.It proved that she never had caused any mental torture as still u want her back .Section 498 A itself is a cause for unbearable mental agony and harassment.With so much legal knowledge u should not have gone for section 9 while ur case under 498 A is still pending to show ur soft side.


Wed Jul 14, 2010 1:57 pm
Profile

Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 1:44 pm
Posts: 5419
Location: Delhi (India)
Hi Meeta,

My section 9 was filed before she filed 498-A.

It kept moving between Delhi - SC - Chd - Sonepat, and that is why the delay in withdrawing.

And I fully agree with your points, but at that time, I knew not L of law and its processess and was done as suggested by my counsel.

Regards,

Shonee Kapoor

PS: But all is well that ends well. I have got all contradictions when she moved SC for transfer of case, which has helped me in DV, Divorce, 498-A and my complaint to Income Tax. (I am not suggesting that such benefits would come to everyone, I just got plain lucky.)


Thu Jul 15, 2010 3:51 am
Profile YIM

Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:50 pm
Posts: 351
My wife filed 498A/406 on me. Afterwards I filed section 13. And then she filed section 9 along with section 24 and section 125. My question is can section 24 be filed without having section 9. Or can section 24 be dismissed if I am able to force my wife to withdraw section 9.

Why I am asking is because: 498A and section 9 are filed by my wife which are contradicting. A 498A FIR can be quashed based on fact that section 9 was filed by wife along with 498A. So in that case, wife would be forced to withdraw section 9 if she doesnt want to 498A FIR to be quashed. If she withdraws section 9, will automatically section 24 goes away??

Thanks


Thu Jul 15, 2010 4:26 am
Profile

Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 1:44 pm
Posts: 5419
Location: Delhi (India)
HMA 24 is Maintenance Pendente Lite, which is during the pendency of a suit under any HMA proceedings.

If HMA 9 is withdrawn and dismissed, HMA 24 cease to be operative.


Thu Jul 15, 2010 5:01 am
Profile YIM

Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 11:40 am
Posts: 20
shoneek,
would be grateful if u could give us more details of the income tax complaint you made.
I am preparing myself for defence on the alimony/maintenance part - my wife earns a lot of income in cash and little in cheque, keeps telling me that her income is so less that she needs a pot of money from me (talks only abt her cheque income)


Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:04 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 7 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software for PTF.