NOORUN NISHA Vs. MAQSOOD AHMAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision by the Muslim wife and her minor son through the non-applicant Muslim husband is directed against the impugned order of the first revisional Court whereby the litigation expenses and the interim maintenance granted by the Court below in proceedings initiated at the instance of the applicants under Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, (in short, the "Act") have been set aside.

(2.) It is not disputed that after the date of her divorce and after the period of her iddat, the applicant No. 1 filed a petition against the non-applicant for realisation of the amount of Mahr as also for her maintenance and the maintenance of her minor son under Section 3 of the said Act. She also made an application for directing the non-applicant to pay the amount of Mahr and also to pay her and to her minor son interim maintenance and cost of litigation. On the basis of this application, it appears that the Court below was pleased to direct the non-applicant to pay the amount of Mahr as also to pay interim maintenance and cost of litigation to the applicant. Being aggrieved, the non-application-husband preferred a revision which was allowed by the IV th Addl. Sessions Judge, Jabalpur, by its impugned order dated 20-7- 1993. Being aggrieved, the applicants have preferred this criminal revision.

(3.) It was not disputed before me that the applicant no. 1 was married to the non-applicant on 25-2-1988 and that the applicant No. 2 was born to them on 23-10-1989. After the birth of applicant No.2, the applicant No.1 was divorced by the non-applicant on 8-8-1990. The instant application under Section 3 of the Act was filed by the applicants on 14-8-1991. It is not dispute that the amount of Mahr that was awarded by the Court below and affirmed by the impugned revisional order has been paid by the non-applicant to the applicant NO. 1. Now, therefore, the question that is required to be answered is Whether the applicants are entitled to any maintenance and/or interim maintenance and cost of litigation from the non-applicant under Section 3 of the Act. Before deciding that question, it would be necessary to look to the relevant provisions of Act which read as follows :--