GHARI LAL Vs. SURJIT KOUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner obtained an ex parte decree against the respondent under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act on 19-11-1992. The respondent filed an application for setting aside the ex parte decree. This application was filed after the period of limitation, therefore, an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was also filed. The application appears to be pending before the Lower Court. During the pendency of the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, the wife, (respondent herein) filed an application under Section 30 of the Hindu Marriage Act for grant of maintenance pendente-lite and expenses of the proceedings. This application was resisted on various grounds and a preliminary objection was taken that the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is not a proceeding within the meaning of Section 30 of the Hindu Marriage Act, therefore, no maintenance in terms if Section 30 of the Hindu Marriage Act could be ordered.

(2.) The learned District Judge found that the proceedings pending before hint, i.e. application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was proceeding within the meaning of Section 30 of the Hindu Marriage Act, therefore, he rejected the objection raised by the present petitioner.

(3.) The short point which has to be decided by this Court is that whether during the pendency of an application for condonation of delay in filing the application for setting aside an ex-parte decree, passed under the provisions of Hindu a Marriage Act, would be a proceeding within the meaning of Section 30 of the Hindu Marriage Act.