TAPAS ROY Vs. MANTI SAHA (ROY)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 21.07.2014 passed by the learned Family Court, West Tripura, Agartala in Case No. Civil Misc. 91 of 2014.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case are that the respondent -wife filed a petition claiming maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The petitioner -husband was the respondent before the learned Family Court. This petition was taken up for the first time on 4th March, 2014 when notice was issued to the respondent -husband for 5th May, 2014. Reply was filed by the husband on 21.06.2014 and the matter was listed for evidence on 21.07.2014. On 21.07.2014 the wife was present along with her witnesses and they were all examined. The husband was present and he was examined and the following order was passed by the learned Family Court:

(3.) BEFORE the Family Court the parties are not represented by the counsel. The Presiding Officer of the Family Court must realize that the parties are not aware of the niceties of law. There is nothing in the order dated 21st June, 2014 that in case the witnesses are not available on the next date i.e. 21st July, 2014 then no further opportunity shall be granted. This was the first date fixed for evidence and the witnesses of the respondent -wife were examined. The husband also appeared in the witness box and was examined. He had asked for one month's time only to produce his other evidence. Heavens would not have fallen if one month's time was granted.