SUMER SINGH SALKAN Vs. REEMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition, the petitioner has assailed an order dated 18 th August, 2008 whereby a revision petition filed by the petitioner against an order dated 29th September, 2007 of the learned MM fixing maintenance of `25,000/- per month was dismissed. It is submitted by the Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had all along lived in Canada. Marriage between the petitioner and the respondent did not click and differences arose soon after the marriage with the result that the petitioner and respondent did not live together. While the petitioner remained at Canada; the respondent remained at India. The respondent's relatives were occupying high position in police with the result that respondent launched various prosecutions and criminal cases against the petitioner and an LOC (Look Out Circular) was issued against the petitioner. For this reason that petitioner could not come to India and prosecute the case. The advocate appointed by the petitioner to take care of maintenance case also did not properly prosecute the case and petitioner suffered ex-parte order under Section 125 Cr.P.C. wherein the petitioner's version could not at all be considered by the MM, the petitioner being ex parte.

(2.) WITHOUT going into merits of the case and looking at the fact that the execution petition filed by the respondent was pending since long, it would be appropriate if the petitioner is given opportunity to lead evidence before the trial Court on furnishing adequate, security so that whatever order is passed by the trial Court is also executed and the respondent is not again left high and dry as the petitioner is not resident of India.