DHIREN JAYANTILAL SHAH Vs. CHETNA DHIRENBHAI SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Ms.Shah, learned Counsel for Respondent No.1 waives service of notice of Rule and Mr.Kogje, learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of Respondent No.2. With the consent of the parties the matter is taken up for final hearing today.

(2.) The short facts of the case are that the Respondent No.1, who is the wife preferred application under Section 125 of Cr. P.C., for maintenance at the rate of Rs.2,000/- for herself and Rs.2,000/- for the daughter, total Rs.4,000/- per month from the petitioner, who is the husband. The respondent for herself and for her daughter preferred interim application for maintenance at the rate of Rs.2,000/- plus Rs.2,000/-, total Rs.4,000/- per month. The learned Magistrate after hearing both the sides passed the order on 27.1.2004, whereby the application has been partly allowed and the maintenance to the wife of Rs.400/- per month and the maintenance to the daughter of Rs.300/- per month total Rs.700/- per month is ordered to be paid from the date of the application until final order. It appears that the petitioner herein has also preferred Hindu Marriage Petition (HMP) for declaration that the marriage is a nullity and the said petition is registered in the Court of Civil Judge (S.D.), Bhavnagar as HMP-121/2003. It also appears that the wife who is opponent in the proceedings of HMP, preferred application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act for interim alimony and the cost of the litigation and it was prayed for interim maintenance of Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.10,000/- towards cost of litigation. The aforesaid application was submitted on 1.1.2001. It also appears that thereafter the learned Civil Judge below the application for interim alimony has passed the order on 28.1.2004, whereby it is ordered to pay the maintenance of Rs.1,500/- per month to the wife and the daughter pending the petition and for the miscellaneous expenses, it is ordered to pay Rs.500/- to the wife. It appears that the petitioner herein preferred the revision before the learned Sessions Judge against the order of the learned Magistrate ordering for interim maintenance of Rs.700/- per month.

(3.) It was contended by the petitioner in the proceedings of the revision before the learned Sessions Judge that in view of the order passed by the Civil Court in the proceedings of HMP for interim alimony, the adjustment is required to be given and the petitioner would not be required to pay the amount as ordered by the learned Magistrate. It appears that the learned Sessions Judge found that no illegality is committed by the trial Court and it is also found that the trial Court has not declined to adjust the amount and as the amount is not more it appears that the adjustment is not made and it is found by the learned Sessions Judge that no illegality is committed by the trial Court and, therefore, the revision is dismissed. It is under these circumstances the petitioner has approached this Court by preferring this petition.