RAJ VEER SINGH Vs. SHASHI BALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision by the husband has been directed against the order dated 14.9.1993 passed by VIII Additional C.J.M., Moradabad in Criminal Case No. 524 of 1993 allowing the application for execution of maintenance allowance for a period of one year at the rate of Rs. 150/- per month.

(2.) It appears that Smt. Shashi Bala was granted maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs. 150/per month vide order dated 30.11.1987. She filed an application for the recovery of the balance of the maintenance allowance, whereupon the present revisionist filed an application stating that a compromise had been arrived at between the parties, that in view of this compromise no dispute remains between the parties, that Smt. Shashi Bala was not entitled to claim maintenance allowance after the compromise and that her application for recovery of maintenance allowance should have been dismissed by the Trial Court. From a perusal of the material made available it would appear that Raj Veer Singh filed Criminal Revision No. 412 of 1987 against the order dated 30.11.1987 passed by the Trial Court. In that revision an application was filed on 8.1.1990 stating that talks of compromise are taking place between the parties and therefore the revision is not being pressed. Upon this application the revision was dismissed on that very date. At that time Sri Virendra Sharma, Advocate was appearing for Raj Veer Singh, while Mr. K.P. Chaturvedi was present for Smt. Shashi Bala. After dismissal of this revision the order of maintenance allowance passed by the Trial Court became final and I do not think the revisionist can now be allowed to say that the matter has been compromised.

(3.) The copy of order dated 7.2.1992 passed by VII Additional Munsif Magistrate, Moradabad in Case No. 111 of 1986 Smt. Shashi Bala v. Raj Veer Singh has also been produced for my perusal. It shows that Raj Veer Singh filed the true copy of order of the Revisional Court. The Court observed that the applications under Section 125 Cr.P.C. has already been decided and the revision has been dismissed as having not been pressed, the Court, therefore, did not proceed with the case and consigned the records. The copy of order of the Revisional Court was also placed before Vth Additional Munsif Magistrate, Moradabad. From a perusal of this order it cannot be said that the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. were consigned to the record room. Since the revision was dismissed, there was no occasion for consigning the record of proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Even if for the sake of argument it is assumed that these proceedings were consigned it would not help the revisionist in any way.