MANISH Vs. MONICA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel Mr. N.H. Shams for the applicant. None appears for the non-applicant. Admit. Heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for the applicant.

(2.) The applicant is the respondent in Petition No. E-100/2011 pending before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Nagpur. The said petition has been filed by the non-applicant Mrs. Monica Kanojiya for grant of maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It appears that the applicant was not regularly attending the dates of hearing and that has caused delay in deciding the petition filed by the non-applicant for grant of maintenance. The Family Court has taken serious note of the conduct of the applicant and has observed that he is not interested in contesting the petition. The impugned order bars the applicant from cross-examining the witnesses examined by the non-applicant and further bears him to adduce his evidence. The learned Counsel for the applicant assures this Court that henceforth the applicant will be punctual in attending the court and he will see that the proceedings are completed as expeditiously as possible. He undertakes to abide by the orders of the Family Court and will not take any undue step which may cause delay in decision of the said petition. In view of the statement made on behalf of the applicant, I am inclined to set aside the order passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Nagpur in Petition No. E-100/2011 on 26th September. 2012 and I am further inclined to direct the Family Court to allow the applicant to cross-examine the witnesses who have not cross-examined by the applicant and further allow the applicant to adduce his own evidence. Hence, I direct that the applicant shall be allowed to cross-examine the witnesses of the non-applicant, who are not cross-examined by the applicant. The applicant shall be permitted to adduce his evidence. The applicant shall ensure that he does not cause any delay in disposal of the said application. If the applicant does not abide by the statement made before this Court, the Family Court is at liberty to take necessary steps for expeditious disposal of the petition.