VIRENDER KUMAR TULI Vs. ASHA RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was directed to pay Rs. 200/- per mensem as maintenance pendente lite and Rs. 500/- as litigation expenses of this petition by K.S. Tiwana, J. vide order dated March 2, 1982. The petitioner has neither complied with that order nor he intends to do so as stated by his counsel. However, he urges that this order being void the petitioner is not bound to complied with it. The order is stated to be void on the ground that the learned Judge has not at all mentioned as to what was the income of the petitioner or of the respondent or what was their financial resources. That may be so but on that score it cannot be said that the order is void one. As the petitioner has declined to comply with his order, he is not entitled to prosecute this petition Same is accordingly dismissed.