PROF AMARJIT SINGH Vs. SURINDER KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) F. A. O. No. 172-M of 1985 filed on behalf of the wife arising out of a divorce petition was dismissed vide order dated 6-3-1986. Dissatisfied with the same, wife Surinder Kaur filed Letters Patent Appeal No. 338 of 1986 and simultaneously also moved an application for review before the learned Single Judge of his order dated 6-3-1986. The said review application was contested on behalf of the husband. However, after hearing learned counsel for the parties, the review application was allowed and the order dated 6-3-1986 was recalled vide order dated 21-5-1986. Dissatisfied with the said order, the husband filed Letters Patent Appeal No. 558 of 1986. Learned counsel for the husband appellant submitted that there was no ground for reviewing the earlier order and hence the order dated 21-5-1986 was illegal and without jurisdiction. At this stage. Rule 7 Order XLVII of the Code of Civil Procedure may be reproduced as under:--

(2.) THUS, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that it is a matrimonial matter, we do not go into at this stage as to whether the order dated 21-5-1986 allowing the review was warranted or not as this objection will be available to the party in an appeal from the decree which may be finally passed in the divorce petition by the learned Single Judge.

(3.) AT this stage, learned counsel for the husband-appellant stated that the wife is unnecessarily delaying the matter for getting maintenance pendente lite. On this, it was stated at the Bar on behalf of the wife that no maintenance will be claimed by her as long as the matter remains pending before the learned Single Judge.