LATIKA GHOSH Vs. NIRMAL KUMAR GHOSH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule was obtained by the petitioner against two orders of the learned trial Judge in the Matrimonial Suit, pending before him, for judicial separation at the instance of the opposite party (husband). By the first order, the learned trial Judge directed the petitioner (wife) to file her written statement before her application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act for alimony pcndente lite would be heard. By the second order, the said learned Judge rejected the petitioner's prayer for time to file written statement on the ground that the same could not be filed before the alimony matter was decided, and fixed a particular date for ex parte hearing of the suit.

(2.) In our view, this Rule must be made absolute and the impugned orders must be set aside. It is not open to the learned Judge under the statute, as it stands, or, under the relevant law, to impose a condition on an applicant for alimony that her said application will not be heard unless she files her written statement. The statute nowhere permits auch a course, which would be opposed to the equities of the instant case, and. accordingly the first of the above two orders of the learned trial Judge is wrong and must be set aside.

(3.) The second order seems to be a dependent order and further, on the face of it, it is unjust, when it fixes the suit for ex parte hearing after rejection of the petitioner's prayer for time to file the written statement in the circumstances of this case We would, accordingly, set aside that order too.