ARAM SINGH Vs. MEMWATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BHAGWAN Din, J. Heard Sri VS. Kushwaha, the learned counsel appearing for the revisionist. The factual and the legal question involved in this revision is so trivial that the notice to the opposite party No. 1, is dispensed with.

(2.) THE opposite party No. 1, Smt. Memwati filed an application under Sec tion 125, Cr. P. C. against her husband the revisionist, Aram Singh alias Pappu for grant of maintenance allowance. THE Judge Family Court, Bareilly, after hearing the parties, examining the assertions made in the application and also in the written statement together with the evidence ad duced in support of the respective claims, allowed the application and granted main tenance allowance to the opposite party No. 1 @ Rs. 400/- per month, from the date ofapplication.

(3.) UNDISPUTCDLY, by the order dated 28-2-97, the Judge, Family Court, has neither recalled, nor modified, nor set aside the order dated 28-2-97, granting maintenance allowance to Smt. Memwati. He simply suspended the operation of the order on the basis of the returning the parties to the terms. When the terms are revoked and the wife refused to live with her husband the suspension of the opera tion of the order automatically stand revoked, because the order was suspended for the reason that parties have decided to live together. In view of the facts and circumstan ces, I find no merit in the revision. The revision is, accordingly, dis missed. Revision dismissed. .