Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan

5 SCC 705Reported decision2003#7940 most cited

What is Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan authority for?

A husband's obligation to maintain his wife and family stands on a higher pedestal than his own needs. Courts should draw adverse inferences if a husband fails to disclose his exact income. Reducing maintenance drastically after retirement without reason is improper.

14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan · maintenance · husband's obligation · wife's maintenance · quantum of maintenance · adverse inference income · reduction of maintenance

Judgments citing Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-1, Delhi vs. Smt. Sangeeta Sawhney

ITA/73/2024HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

Section 29ASection 34

…ality appearing on the face of the award. The proviso to sub-section (2-A) states that an award shall not be set aside merely on the ground of an erroneous application of the law or by reappreciation of evidence. 66. In ONGC Ltd. v. Saw Pipes Ltd., (2003) 5 SCC 705, while dealing with the phrase “public policy of India” as used in Section 34, this Court took the view that the concept of public policy connotes some matter which concerns public good and public interest. If the award, on the face of it, patently violates statutory provisions, it cannot be said to be in public interest. Thus, an award could…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax- 1 vs. M/S Clc & Sons Pvt. Ltd

ITA/194/2022HC Delhi10 Sept 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

Section 21Section 34Section 9

…with if the view taken by the arbitrator is a possible view based on facts. (See Associate Builders v. DDA [Associate Builders v. DDA, (2015) 3 SCC 49 : (2015) 2 SCC (Civ) 204] . Also see ONGC Ltd. v. Saw Pipes Ltd. [ONGC Ltd. v. Saw Pipes Ltd., (2003) 5 SCC 705] ; Hindustan Zinc Ltd. v. Friends Coal Carbonisation [Hindustan Zinc Ltd. v. Friends Coal Carbonisation, (2006) 4 Digitally Signed By:REYMON VASHIST Signing Date:22.12.2025 18:04:59 Signature Not Verified FAO(OS) (COMM) 194/2022 Page 13 of 26 SCC 445] ; and McDermott International Inc. v. Burn Standard Co. Ltd. [McDerm…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Inidabuild Homes Pvt Ltd

ITA/277/2023HC Karnataka29 Aug 2023

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr Justice Ravi V Hosmani R.P. F. C. No. 277 Of 2023 Between:

Section 125Section 125(1)(a)Section 19(4)Section 65

…- 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:21669 RPFC No. 277 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI R.P. F. C. NO. 277 OF 2023 BETWEEN: MR. SHINE T.A., S/O K. THAN KACHAN, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT NO. 7, 2ND CROSS, ANUBHAVANAGAR, NAGARBHAVI MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE 560 071. …PETITIONER [BY SRI. RAMACHANDRA R. NAIK, ADVOCATE (PH)] AND: 1. BABY CAROLYN SHINE, D/O SHINE T.A., AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS, REP. BY HER NATURAL GAURDIAN MOTHER, MRS. RENCY THOMAS, 2. MRS. RENCY THOMAS, W/O SHINE T.A., D/O C.K. THOM…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 5 Kolkata vs. Premier Tie Up Pvt Ltd

ITAT/81/2022HC Calcutta26 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

For Respondent: Mr. Dhruba Ghosh, Adv
Section 34Section 36(1)Section 36(2)

…ence, impartiality and neutrality of arbitrators. In fact, the same Law Commission Report has amended Sections 28 and 34 so as to narrow grounds of challenge available under the Act. The judgment inONGCLtd.v.Saw Pipes Ltd.[ONGC Ltd.v.Saw Pipes Ltd., (2003) 5 SCC 705] has been expressly done away with. So has the judgment inONGCLtd.v.WesternGeco International Ltd.[ONGC Ltd.v.WesternGeco International Ltd., (2014) 9 SCC 263 : (2014) 5 SCC (Civ) 12] Both Sections 34 and 48 have been brought back to the position of law contained inRenusagar Power Co. Ltd.v.General Electric Co.[Renusagar Power Co.…

M/S Nmdc Limited vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeal is allowed

ITTA/23/2018HC Telangana04 Jun 2021

Bench: T.VINOD KUMAR,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

For Appellant: Mr.Ashish Gautam, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Sunil Singh, Advocate
Section 12(1)Section 12(1)(C)Section 19(1)

…gal obligations for reasons beyond his control. If the husband does not disclose the exact amount of his income, an adverse inference may be drawn by the court. 90.5. This Court in Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan [Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan, (2015) 5 SCC 705 : (2015) 3 SCC (Civ) 274 : (2015) 2 SCC (Cri) 785] cited the judgment in Chander Parkash [Chander Parkash v. Shila Rani, 1968 SCC OnLine Del 52 : AIR 1968 Del 174] with approval, and held that the obligation of the husband to provide maintenance stands on a higher pedestal than the wife. 76. This Court, in the touchstone of aforesaid judgment,…

Commissioner of Income Taxexemption vs. Saraswati Sishu Vidya Mandir

The appeal is allowed as at above

ITA/8/2017HC Orissa11 Dec 2019

Bench: MR. JUSTICE K. S. JHAVERI (CJ),MR. JUSTICE K.R.MOHAPATRA

For Appellant: Mr. Pradeep Modi & Sarvendra Kumar, Advocates
Section 34Section 37(1)(b)Section 3A

…rification of construction made on the acquired plot and the competent authority has 3 arbitrarily fixed the cost of construction as Rs.4,54,154.70. Learned Court below has relied on the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court as reported in (2003) 5 SCC 705 wherein it has been held that the Award can be set aside only if it is patently illegal being against the Public Policy. 11. The power of Court while exercising its jurisdiction under section34 of Arbitration and Conciliantion Act, 1996 is a limited one. The court does not sit in appeal against the award of the arbitrator. Specific grounds h…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -7 vs. Punjab and Sindh Bank

ITA/906/2019HC Delhi16 Oct 2019

Bench: The Family Court Are Still Pending & Are Currently At The Stage Of Cross-Examination Of

Section 127Section 19(4)Section 397

…and the enhanced amount shall continue to be paid until the Family Court renders a final decision in MT. Case No. 609/2018. 11. With the above directions, the present petition is disposed of. SANJEEV NARULA, J JANUARY 17, 2025 d.negi 2 (2015) 5 SCC 705 3 Bharat Hegde v. Saroj Hegde, 2007 SCC OnLine Del 622 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/01/2025 at 15:30:29…

Shri H Munireddy vs. The Advocate General

WP/18157/2013HC Karnataka18 Sept 2019

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice B.Veerappa Writ Petition No.18157/2013 (Gm-Res)

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE B.VEERAPPA WRIT PETITION NO.18157/2013 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: Shri H. Munireddy, Aged about 57 years, Adopted S/o. late Munivenkatappa, R/a #376, 15th Cross, 17th ‘C’ Main Road, 4th Sector, H.S.R. Layout, Bengaluru – 560 102. .... Petitioner (By Sri C.M. Nagabushana, Advocate) AND: 1. The Advocate General, State of Karnataka, Chambers at High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru – 560 001. 2. Sri K.N…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -3 vs. Delhi Tourism Transportation Corporation Ltd

ITA/830/2019HC Delhi13 Sept 2019

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

Section 24

…Crl.Rev.P. Nos.830/2019 & 869/2019 Page 1 of 33 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.REV.P. No 830/2019 Judgment reserved on : 26.10.2021 Date of decision : 10.12.2021 RITU SETHI ..... Petitioner Through: Ms.Manika Tripathy Pandey, Advocate with petitioner in person. versus VIVEK SETHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Amarjit Singh Bedi and Mr.Varun Chandiok, Advocates CRL.REV.P. No 869/2019 VIVEK SETHI ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Amarjit Singh B…

Nirmala W/O Dattu @ Dattappa Naikodi and Ors vs. Dattu @ Dattappa S/O Maruti Naikodi

RPFC/200078/2016HC Karnataka14 Mar 2018

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice B. Veerappa Rpfc No.200078/2016 C/W Rpfc No.200001/2017 Rpfc No.200078/2016 Between: 1. Nirmala W/O. Dattu @ Dattappa Naikodi, Age: 35 Years, Occ: Coolie, 2. Maruti S/O. Dattu @ Dattappa Naikodi, Age: 18 Years, Occ: Student (Minor) 3. Aishwarya D/O. Dattu @ Dattappa Naikodi, Age: 13 Years, Occ: Student (Minor) All R/O. H.No. E# 1/5100, Hanuman Nagar, Near Railway Under Bridge, Old Jewargi Road, Kalaburagi – 585102. Petitioner No.2 & 3 Are Being Minors, This Petition Is Filed Through Their Next Friend & Natural Mother Petitioner No.1 ... Petitioners (By Sri Kurkoti Rachanna Basawannappa & Sri Choodamani M Patil, Advocates)

Section 125Section 19(4)

…d to get maintenance from the husband on any legally permissible grounds.” 16. The Hon’ble Supreme Court also while considering the provisions of Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in the case of Shamima Farooqui vs Shahid Khan reported in AIR 2015 5 SCC 705 at Paragraph Nos.14, 16, 17 and 19 held as under:- “Para No.14 :- Coming to the reduction of quantum by the High Court, it is noticed that the High Court has shown immense sympathy to the husband by reducing the amount after his retirement. It has come on record that the husband was getting a 15 monthly salary of Rs.17,654. The High Court, withou…

The Director of Income Tax, (Exemptions) vs. Exhibition Society

ITTA/306/2017HC Telangana05 Jun 2017

Bench: SANJAY KUMAR,M.S.K.JAISWAL

Ms Jayshree Gururaj vs. Cisco Systems (India)Private Limited

WP/19726/2015HC Karnataka06 Oct 2016

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice B.S.Patil W.P.No.19726/2015 (S-Dis) Between: Ms.Jayshree Gururaj, D/O. H.S.Gururaja Rao, Aged About 45 Years, Residing At 341, Adarsh Palm Retreat, Bellandur Outer Ring Road, Bangalore – 560 013.

Section 23

…ing to several other earlier judgments of the Apex Court including CENTRAL INLAND WATER TRANSPORT CORPORATION LIMITED & ANOTHER Vs. BROJO NATH GANGULY & ANOTHER – (1986) 3 SCC 156 and OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LIMITED Vs. SAW PIPES LIMITED – (2003) 5 SCC 705, the apex court has held in paragraph 96 that public policy was not a static concept; it varied with times and from generation to generation; what was in public good and public interest could not be opposed to public policy and vice versa; any rule, contract or arrangement that actually defeated or tended to defeat the high ideals of fairness…

Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. M/s.Kalyani Wines

In the result, I find this appeal bereft of merit and accordingly,

ITTA/6/2010HC Telangana14 Mar 2016

Bench: Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Robin Phukan

Section 11Section 37

…Kayan and Others, reported in (2002) 5 SCC 679. (ii) Rajasthan State Mines and Minerals Ltd. vs. Eastern Engineering Enterprises and Another, reported in (1999) 9 SCC 283. (iii) OIL and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. vs. Saw Pipes Ltd., reported in (2003) 5 SCC 705. (iv) National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Boghara Polycab Private Ltd., reported in (2009) 1 SCC 267. (v) M/s P.K. Rammalah and Company vs. Chairman and Managing Director, National Thermal Power Page 20 of 60 Corporation, reported in 1994 Supp (3) SCC 126. 9. Having heard the submissions of learned Advocates of both sides, I have ca…

M/s. PLL-Suncon Joint Venture vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

ITTA/373/2011HC Telangana29 Nov 2011
Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan (5 SCC 705) — Cited in 14 Judgments | BharatTax