HIRAMANI SHUKLA Vs. RAVINDRA SHUKLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AT the stage of preliminary hearing, an objection was raised by the learned counsel for the respondent that no appeal lies against an order passed under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The impugned order passed by the trial Court was for granting interim maintenance under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act which was dated 24.11.1994 and the trial Court proceeded with the suit according to law.

(2.) IT has been brought to the notice of the Court that an appeal could lie against an order under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Amendment Act No. 68/76 under section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Learned counsel for the respondent relied on the case of Radhe Shayam Gupta v. Laxmi Bai (1977 JLJ 354). In that case, a Division Bench of this Court has specifically held :

(3.) THE interim order passed under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act does not fall within section 104 or under order 43 CPC and was therefore not appealable as held in the case of Prithviraj v. Shivprabha (AIR 1960 Born. 315) and Rajpal v. Dharmavati (AIR 1980 All. 350).