Rajat Patidar's 112 not out guides RCB to 14-run win over LSG
Kolkata, May 25: Rajat Patidar owned the big stage with a magnificent hundred as Royal Challengers Bangalore beat debutants Lucknow Super Giants by 14 runs in the IPL Eliminator here on Wednesday.
RCB will now take on Rajasthan Royals, losers of first qualifiers, in qualifier 2, while Lucknow's journey ended following the defeat here.
Invited to bat, Patidar, the 28-year-old from Madhya Pradesh, produced an innings for the ages as he towered over his more illustrious colleagues with an unbeaten 54-ball 112-run knock that had as many as 12 fours and 7 maximums to power RCB to a huge 207 for 4.
In reply, skipper KL Rahul slammed a 58-ball 79 to keep Lucknow in the hunt but Josh Hazlewood (3/43) dealt a twin blow in the penultimate over as LSG finished at 193 for 6.
Brief Scores:
Royal Challengers Bangalore: 207 for 4 in 20 overs (Rajat Patidar 111 not out; Mohsin Khan 1/25).
Lucknow Super Giants: 193 for 6 in 20 overs (KL Rahul 79; Josh Hazlewood 3/43)
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Allahabad HC sets aside maintenance order in favour of earning wife, says she didn't tell truth
Prayagraj (PTI): The Allahabad High Court has set aside a lower court order mandating a man to pay maintenance to his estranged wife, observing that she earns her living and did not reveal the true salary in her affidavit.
Justice Madan Pal Singh also allowed a criminal revision petition filed by the man, Ankit Saha.
"A perusal of the impugned judgment indicates that in the affidavit filed before the trial court, the opposite party herself admitted that she is a post-graduate and a web designer by qualification. She is working as a senior sales coordinator in a company and getting a salary of Rs 34,000 per month," the court said in the December 3 order.
"But in her cross-examination, she has admitted that she was earning Rs 36,000 per month. Such an amount for a wife who has no other liability cannot be said to be meagre; whereas the man has the responsibility of maintaining his aged parents and other social obligations," it observed.
The high court observed that the woman was not entitled to get any maintenance from her husband "as she is an earning lady and able to maintain herself".
The man's counsel argued in court that the estranged wife did not reveal the whole truth in the affidavit.
"She claimed herself to be an illiterate and unemployed woman. When the document filed by the man was shown to her before the trial court, she admitted her income during cross-examination. Thus, it is clear that she did not come before the trial court with clean hands," the counsel submitted.
The court, in its order, said, "Cases of those litigants who have no regard for the truth and those who indulge in suppressing material facts need to be thrown out of the court."
It impugned the lower court's February 17 judgment and order, passed by the principal judge of a family court in Gautam Buddh Nagar and allowed the criminal revision petition filed by the man.
