RAJ MAL MUKUL Vs. ANJULA MUKUL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PURSUANT to the order passed on 31st August, 2007, petitioner is present in person. He has been identified by Mr. Verma, learned Senior Counsel appearing for him.

(2.) IN the Court order dated 24th July, 2007, certain adverse observations were made about the manner in which the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Shimla, passed the impugned judgment dated 7th March, 2007, in as much as neither any reasons were given nor any grounds mentioned, based upon or linked with appreciation or re-appreciation of evidence or material on record, in support of the conclusion arrived at by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Shimla, whereby the maintenance allowance was increased three folds in the case of respondent No. 1 and one and a half times in the case of respondent No.2. Explanation of the Presiding Officer was also called. The Presiding Officer vide his communication No. AD&SJ/SML/2007-1390, dated 14th August, 2007, addressed to the Registrar General of this Court has sent his explanation, which I have perused. I am not at all satisfied with the explanation and direct that it be processed on the administrative side for initiating appropriate action in the matter.

(3.) I am told that the petitioner is in arrears to the extent of Rs. 2,40,000/-. This was also mentioned in the Court order dated 31st August, 2007. Mr. Verma, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits and undertakes before me that the petitioner shall pay the aforesaid arrears to respondent No.1 in four weeks from today, subject to respondent No.1 through her counsel communicating to the counsel for the petitioner within one week from today the particulars of the Bank Account where the said amount is to be remitted. Mr. Kukreja undertakes to do so in the aforesaid period.