Om Prakash vs Smt. Urmila Devi @ Sirvali

S.K. Agarwal, J.—Sri V.B.L. Srivastava, learned Counsel for the applicant, has sent his illness slip today. Earlier on several occasions in the past he had been either sending illness slips or getting the case adjourned. Initially the order of Hon. J.C. Mishra, J. dated 5.10.1998 is a revelation of his conduct. On 5.10.1998 the Court did not honour his illness slip. On that date the Court has found that there is a Vakalatnama of Sri A.R.B. Kher on behalf of the applicant. The matter was then directed to come up on the list with name of Sri A.R.B. Kher. Today Sri Vinod Kumar Srivastava holding brief of Sri A.R.B. Kher is present in Court. I have heard him.

Sri Srivastava was directed to file a copy of the written statement and copy of the statement made before the Judge, Family Court. The office report dated 8.11.1994 shows that the orders have not been complied with. The subsequent reports also are to the same effect.

Sri Vinod Kumar Srivastava has produced a Kachchi (uncertified) copy of the written statement of the applicant today. On an examination of that it is apparent that he had been taking false pleas. I have gone through the impugned order also. I do not find any infirmity in the order nor the learned Counsel has pointed out any such illegality to me. The order shows that the applicant is possessing agricultural holdings to the tune of 50 Bighas. This fact find some corroboration from paragraph 9 of the written statement wherein he had stated that his wife, the opposite party in this revision, was suffering from epilepsy and he had to sell 13 bighas of land for her treatment. In another paragraph, i.e., paragraph No. 11. he has stated that his family had given, at the time of marriage, jewellery worth Rs. 30,000. His case that he is a labourer and earns only Rs. 25 per day stands beyond belief.

For the reasons above, this revision has no merit and is accordingly dismissed.

It has been submitted after this much of the order was dictated that some time be allowed to pay the arrears. In my view the prayer has some force. The order is dated 15.9.1994 and the payment of Rs. 350 per month as maintenance allowance is allowed from the date of the application. The application is dated 28.5.1992. Thus, the amount, at this rate, will be quite large. It will not be possible for him to make payment in one stroke. Bearing this circumstances in mind, I direct that the applicant will pay 1/3rd amount within six weeks from today, second 1/3rd amount shall be paid in another six weeks and the last 1/3rd amount shall be paid in the next two months. Whatever amount he has deposited in pursuance to the impugned order shall be adjusted towards the entire amount so calculated by the trial court. He is further directed to continue to pay the maintenance allowance regularly every month by 10th day of every month as fixed by the trial court. This will be in addition to the instalments fixed by me.

A copy of the order shall be supplied to the learned Counsel for the applicant within a week.