Hemantsing Bharatsing Rajput vs Nishigandha Hemantsing Rajput Advocate - Jadhao CS — 17/2020
Case under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act Section 29. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 10th March 2026.
Cri.Appeal
CNR: MHBU010004032020
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
162/2020
Filing Date
09-03-2020
Registration No
17/2020
Registration Date
11-03-2020
Court
District and Session Court Buldhana
Judge
8-District Judge-2 & Additional Sess.Judge, Buldana.
Decision Date
10th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Hemantsing Bharatsing Rajput
Adv. Meher RD
Bharatsing Padamsing Rajput
Adv. Bawaskar V
Bali Bharatsing Rajput
Rohini Radhesham Rajput
Adv. Bawaskar V
Dipali Kuldip Solanke
Ganga Padmasing Rajput
Adv. Bawaskar V
Jaysing Padmasing Rajput
Adv. Bawaskar V
Respondent(s)
Nishigandha Hemantsing Rajput Advocate - Jadhao CS
Hearing History
Judge: 8-District Judge-2 & Additional Sess.Judge, Buldana.
Disposed
Judgment
Judgment
Judgment
Arguments
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 07-03-2026 | Judgment | |
| 25-02-2026 | Judgment | |
| 12-02-2026 | Judgment | |
| 28-01-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court partially allowed the husband's appeal against a domestic violence judgment. While affirming that the husband subjected his wife to domestic violence through mental abuse and economic neglect, the court set aside the trial court's award of ₹3,000/month additional maintenance, finding the husband's actual salary was ₹54,000/month (not ₹78,469 as the trial court calculated), and the wife was already receiving ₹10,000/month maintenance under criminal procedure law. The court upheld grants of ₹5,000/month for rent, ₹50,000 compensation, and ₹2,000 litigation costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Summary The court partially allowed the husband's appeal against a domestic violence judgment. While affirming that the husband subjected his wife to domestic violence through mental abuse and economic neglect, the court set aside the trial court's award of ₹3,000/month additional maintenance, finding the husband's actual salary was ₹54,000/month (not ₹78,469 as the trial court calculated), and the wife was already receiving ₹10,000/month maintenance under criminal procedure law. The court upheld grants of ₹5,000/month for rent, ₹50,000 compensation, and ₹2,000 litigation costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts