BANDULAL Vs. SANIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri T.M. Nadaf, learned counsel for petitioner and Shri Ram P. Ghorpade, learned counsel appearing for respondent. Perused the case papers.

(2.) Order passed by Family Court, Belgaum in Crl. Misc. No. 169/2007 dated 24.09.2009 along with petition filed by respondents under Sec. 125 Cr.P.C., whereunder respondent therein has been directed to pay maintenance of Rs. 2,000/ - per month to wife and Rs. 1,000/ - per month to each of petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 therein from the date of filing of petition i.e., 16.04.2007 has been called in question.

(3.) This litigation has pending for past five years and same is being postponed for being decided on one ground or other for the reasons attributable to the litigants themselves as is evident from the records namely order sheet of this matter would indicate that learned advocates after having taken time to arrive at an amicable settlement got the matter referred to Lok Adalath and before Lok Adalath a joint memo came to be filed on 26.08.2011. Pursuant to which matter was ordered to be listed before Court for recording the compromise and thereafter, certain difference of opinion is said to have arisen between parties, due to which compromise petition was not filed. Hence, matter has been listed for admission. From time to time, it has been adjourned for one reason or other. Hence, I have examined the order under challenge on merits by considering the contentions raised by respective learned Advocates.