V SUPPAN Vs. MEENAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent -husband in Maintenance Case No. 12/ 92 and Crl. M.P. No. 1196/93 therein on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No. IV, Dindigul, aggrieved at the order passed on 1.6.1993 allowing the said miscellaneous petition to recall witness examined already and mark some important document, is canvassing the present revision for its want of legality and propriety.

(2.) ON the ground of desertion and inability to maintain herself, the respondent -wife herein has filed the original maintenance case before the learned Judicial Magistrate in M.C. No. 12/92 under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure claiming maintenance from the petitioner. It was resisted by him inter alia contending that she is not entitled to claim any maintenance and disputed the marriage as well as the alleged means position. It appears from the case records and the impugned order that recording of the legal evidence on behalf of the respective parties were over. At this stage, a petition under Section 311 Cr. P.C. was filed on behalf of the respondent -wife the substratum of which has been extracted as hereunder:

(3.) HAVING heard the case above referred, the learned Magistrate was inclined to accept the request of recalling PW1, filing and marking some document through her and consequently allowed the petition on 1.6.1993. Aggrieved at this, the respondent -husband has come forward with this revision canvassing the propriety and legality of the impugned order above referred.