SHEILASH KUMAR CHAURASIA Vs. PREETI CHAURASIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) KUNDAN Singh, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the impugned order. Learned counsel for the applicant could not point out any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order dated 3-12-1993, interim maintenance of Rs. 300 per month to the opposite party, calling for any interference by this Court in its revisional jurisdiction this remain is dismissed in mean time.

(2.) IN the last the learned counsel for the applicant stated that the proceedings for maintenance are pending before the Magistrate sine; 4-9-1991 and those proceedings could not be decided due to frequent adjournments granted on the request of the opposite party. The learned counsel prayed that a direction may be issued to the Magistrate concerned to concluded the pro ceedings to a shorter period. The prayer of the Counsel is genuine.