SUNIL KASHINATH KALE Vs. AARTI SUNIL KALE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of parties taken up for final hearing.

(2.) THE petitioner is the judgment debtor. The present respondent had filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights which came to be allowed. The respondent preferred execution invoking the provisions of Order XXI Rule 32 and 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(3.) SHRI Pawar, the learned counsel for the respondent contends that provisions of Order XXI Rule 33 are independent and the powers of the Court U/O XXI Rule 33 are not restricted by provisions of Order XXI Rule 32. The power U/O XXI Rule 33 can be independently exercised de-hors the provisions of Order XXI Rule 32. More than three years have passed the petitioner has not obeyed the decree. As such, the Court below was justified in passing the impugned order. No illegality has been committed by the Court below. The learned counsel relies on the judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court in a case of Vijendra B. Singh Vs. Uma Vijendra Singh reported in 2011 (1) B.C.R. 383.