(1.) THIS civil revision petition, filed under Art.227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order passed in I.A.No.4 of 1993 in O.P.No.97 of 1991 on the file of Family Court, Pondicherry.
(2.) SHORT facts are: The revision petitioner had earlier filed suit in O.S.No.34 of 1984 for maintenance against the respondent and the trial court ordered maintenance at the rate of Rs.350 p.m. Aggrieved by the quantum of maintenance, the revision petitioner filed A.S.No.732 of 1984 on the file of this Court and this court had allowed her appeal and enhanced the maintenance at the rate of Rs.550 p.m. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the respondent had filed appeal in L.P.A.No.123 of 1991 and it is pending. While so, the revision petitioner filed O.P.No.97 of 1991 for enhancement of maintenance before the Family Court, Pondicherry. While so, the respondent had filed petition under Scc.10, C.P.C. in I.A.No.4 of 1993 praying for stay of the trial of the Original Petition in O.P.No.97 of 1991. That was opposed by the revision petitioner. After hearing both sides, the learned judge of the Family Court, Pondicherry, had allowed the application. Aggrieved by the same, the respondent in I. A.No.4 of 1993 has filed this revision petition.
(3.) PER contra, Mr.K.P.Gopalakrishnan, learned counsel for the respondent, would submit that in L.P.A.No.123 of 1991, this Court had stayed the proceedings and that decision in L.P.A.No.123 of 1991 has got a direct bearing to the subject matter in O.P.No.93 of 1991 and hence the order of the court below is correct. He would further submit that if the revision petitioner is aggrieved, she ought to have filed regular revision and the present case would not fall within the scope of Art.227 of the Constitution of India.