RAM KRISHAN Vs. REKHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Counsel for appellant submitted that he filed a suit for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act (for short, H.M. Act) on 16.9.2000. Thereafter, the respondent wife filed an application under Section 24 of H.M. Act claiming maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses on 13.12.2000. On the said application, Principal Judge, Family Court, Lucknow passed an order dated 13.11.2001 granting the interim maintenance as prayed for. This is also a submission of Learned Counsel that the parties also attended a conciliation proceeding, and the respondent wife stayed with her husband between 24.5.2004 and 29.7.2004. However, she again left her matrimonial home without a valid reason.

(2.) Learned Counsel also submitted that the appellant moved an application for withdrawal of the suit under Section 9 of H.M. Act on 15.1.2005 and the expression of intention of appellant to withdraw the pending suit is enough to treat it as withdrawn. However, contrary to the settled principles of law, the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Lucknow, vide impugned order dated 1.5.2009, has directed the appellant to pay the maintenance allowance from 13.11.2001 to 13.7.2006 apart from litigation expenses.

(3.) Thus, Learned Counsel submitted that the appellant is not liable to pay any maintenance for the period; the respondent wife had stayed with him between 24.5.2004 and 27.7.2004, besides also for the period after filing of the application for withdrawal of the suit under Section 9 of the H.M. Act.