RAJENDRASINGH BAHADURSINGH CHAUHAN Vs. PRIYADARSHNI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these revision applications are arising between same parties and from the same proceeding before the Family Court, Gandhinagar being Criminal Misc. Application No. 38 of 2013 (old Criminal Misc. Application No. 793 of 2007) preferred by the respondent No. 1 herein claiming maintenance from the applicant herein. Thereby, applicant is husband whereas respondent No. 1 is wife before the Family Court.

(2.) I have heard learned advocate Mr. Jayraj Chauhan for the applicant and learned advocate Mr. M.A. Barot for respondent No. 1 and learned APP Ms. Jirga Jhaveri for respondent No. 2.

(3.) LEARNED advocate for the petitioner has prepared a list of irregularities which runs into 8 pages. However, at this stage I am of the opinion that instead of reproducing such irregularity, which would result into prejudice the main matter, since all such revision applications are against interim order, it is necessary at least to recall some of the irregularities to the effect that;