Ashok Pralhad Dandade vs Leelabai Ashok Dandade Advocate - INGOLE MURLIDHAR DATTA — 38/2022

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 397. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 22nd May 2026.

Cri.Rev.App. - Criminal Revision Application

CNR: MHWS010015972022

Case disposed

Filing Number

752/2022

Filing Date

04-10-2022

Registration No

38/2022

Registration Date

04-10-2022

Court

District and Sessions Court, Washim

Judge

3-District Judge 2 and ASJ, Washim

Decision Date

22nd May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Section 397

Petitioner(s)

Ashok Pralhad Dandade

Adv. Shaikh Zahir Gafoor

Respondent(s)

Leelabai Ashok Dandade Advocate - INGOLE MURLIDHAR DATTA

Seema Ashok Dandade

Hearing History

Judge: 3-District Judge 2 and ASJ, Washim

22-05-2026

Disposed

21-05-2026

Order

16-05-2026

Order

14-05-2026

Order

29-04-2026

Order

Final Orders / Judgements

22-05-2026
Copy of Judgment

The Additional Sessions Judge, Washim dismissed Ashok Pralhad Dandade's revision petition challenging the lower court's order that partially set aside the 1995 maintenance judgment. The court upheld maintenance for Leelabai (Rs. 400/month) while setting aside it for their daughter Seema, finding that Ashok failed to prove Leelabai's income from the transferred agricultural land or that the Rs. 35,000 bank deposit was made, and noting Ashok's sufficient pension income justified continued maintenance despite the alleged 1997 settlement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The Additional Sessions Judge, Washim dismissed Ashok Pralhad Dandade's revision petition challenging the lower court's order that partially set aside the 1995 maintenance judgment. The court upheld maintenance for Leelabai (Rs. 400/month) while setting aside it for their daughter Seema, finding that Ashok failed to prove Leelabai's income from the transferred agricultural land or that the Rs. 35,000 bank deposit was made, and noting Ashok's sufficient pension income justified continued maintenance despite the alleged 1997 settlement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District and Sessions Court, Washim All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case