LATA DEVI Vs. UMESH NANDAN SHARRNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS case has been listed under the heading "To Be Mentioned" on my orders.

(2.) BY order dated 5.5.2006 passed in this case, I had held that against an order passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court under the provisions of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (In short "the Act") with reference to Sec. 125 of Criminal Procedure Code (In short "Cr. PC"), the order being passed in exercise of jurisdiction under Cr.P.C, the remedy would be under Cr. PC. and not Civil Procedure Code (In short, "C.P.C."). In other words the appropriate remedy would be by filing a criminal revision. Liberty was then granted to the petitioners to convert the civil revision application into a criminal revision application by the said order.

(3.) IN order to set the controversy at rest, I may first refer to Section 7(2)(a) of the Act. "the jurisdiction exercisable by a Magistrate of the First Class under Chapter IX (relating to order for maintenance of wife, children and parents) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)."