ASHWANI KUMAR JANGRA Vs. SNEH LATA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Counsel for the petitioner-husband referring to impugned orders dated 11.4.2013 and 24.3.2014 (Annexure P-4 and P-7 respectively) urges that since replication could not have been filed as a matter of right after filing of the written statement by the wife, respondent herein, on 11.4.2013, he could not have filed the replication without going to the written statement and without coming forward with an application for leave of the Court to file the same. Thus, question of granting of opportunity of filing of the replication by the court on 11.4.2013 as is mentioned in the impugned orders is out of question. Referring to impugned order (Annexure P-7), it is, interalia, contended that since replication could not have been filed as a matter of right much less on the day of filing of the written statement, observations of the lower court that replication was not filed even after grant of opportunity by the court for the same, is totally incorrect as per record.

(2.) There is merit in the plea of the petitioner-husband. There was no reason for declining the request of the petitioner-husband who was seeking leave of the Court for filing of the replication to the written statement particularly when new pleas had been taken by the respondentwife therein. Thus, impugned order (Annexure P-7) being against facts as also in law is set aside and the petitioner-husband is allowed to file replication.

(3.) Since the petition is delayed in its disposal, the same would be decided within three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order by giving three opportunities each to both the parties to lead their evidence and even by conducting day to day proceedings, if the situation so demands.