25% OFF on all LCI Courses. Offer valid till 5th Oct. Use Code: DUS25
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Call record details

(Querist) 13 September 2012 This query is : Resolved 
Ld Counsels

Petition filed to cause production of post paid bill with call details of brother in law who has made threatening calls. Brother in law was amde a third party in the petition and since court notice returned unserved private notice was served to the address which is not mentioned in the petition as he has moved to new residence in the mean time.

Family Court had dismissed the petition holding that no purpose will be served in summoning the documents even if any calls were made as alleged as the exact details of the conversation wont be available.

This is a corroborative piece of evidence to establish that brother in law who was involved in several criminal cases and economic offenses been in need of money has used the marriage to extract money from the other side.

Further court has held that no service has effected and no steps were taken to send notice to third party.

even though proof of service was filed and the address mentioned there-in was different from the one in the petition.

Also the phone connection is in the name of employer and the employer was set ex parte however the petition was dismissed for the above reasons.

Please advise if there is a good case to go for revision to obtain the call details and post paid bill

Thanks.
Kiran Kumar (Expert) 14 September 2012
the point raised is good....you may go for Revision but you will have to establish your case there in proper manner.
Ranganath (Querist) 15 September 2012
Counsels, Family court was aslo carried away by the direciton of the high court for expiditious disposal and held that at this juncture after 4 years such documents may not be needed for disposal. Please advise. thanks.
sibasish pattanayak (Expert) 18 September 2012
TO ALL MY FRIEND
ANOTHERGOOD NEWS FOR HUSBANDS, IN MY CASE JMFC ALIPORE REJECTED THE INTERIM APPLICATION U/S.125 CR.P.C. WHILE WIFE SUBMITTED SHE HAS NO INCOME OF HER OWN , IN REPLY I POINTED OUT REGARDING HER MONTHLY INCOME @RS.3000 -5000/-
LD. JMFCWAS PLEASED TO REJECT THE PRAYER OF MAINTENANCE AS INTERIM.
IN THIS MONTH THIS IS THE SECOND VICTORY FOR HUSBAND.
REGARDS
SIBASISH PATTANAYAK, ADVOCATE.
09874854594 / 09231668664 / 09477090999.
Tajobsindia (Expert) 20 September 2012
In my opinion 4 years is long time to now call for the said documents and argue afresh.


You need to be the querist or approved LAWyersclub expert to take part in this query .


Click here to login now



Similar Resolved Queries :





Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query