IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WPMS No. 1704 of 2010 Smt. Monia …..Petitioner. Versus Family Judge, Haridwar and another. …..Respondents. Present : Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Pushpa Joshi, Advocate for the respondent no.2. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) Heard Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Advocate for the petitioner as well as Ms. Pushpa Joshi, Advocate for respondent no.2. The petitioner who is the wife of respondent no.2 has filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 7.9.2010 passed by the learned Family Judge, Haridwar in Suit No. 268 of 2007 Kanwaljeet Singh Wadhwa Vs. Smt. Monia Wadhwa, whereby the learned Family Judge has rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for grant of arrears of maintenance from respondent no. 2 on the ground that such application cannot be entertained in a divorce suit. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 22.9.2010 passed by the Family Judge, Haridwar whereby the application of the petitioner for allowing the petitioner to cross-examine the witnesses has been rejected on the ground that in spite of approximately 20 opportunities (though counsel for the petitioner denied this and stated that this finding is not correct), the wife has failed to turn up and has wasted court’s time as such he has no option except to pass this order. Court below has also observed that in this matter there are directions of the High Court to decide the matter expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months, and therefore the court was constrained to pass this order. Heard Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Advocate for the petitioner/wife and Ms. Pushpa Joshi, Advocate for respondent no.2/husband. Since in a matrimonial matter unnecessary delay causes undue hardships and heart burning to both the parties, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the present writ petition after hearing both the parties with the following directions :- Under the facts and circumstances, although no indulgence is required inasmuch as there has been repeated fault on the part of the wife 2 who has not turned up for cross-examination, yet in the interest of justice and on the undertaking given by Sri Ramji Srivastava counsel for the petitioner as well as respondent no. 2 that the clients will be present before the Family Court on 8.10.2010, it is directed that on 8.10.2010 the Family Court will hear the wife i.e. the petitioner instead of closing the opportunity of cross-examination. Since averment has been made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner/wife is not getting any maintenance since May, 2010, although she is entitled for maintenance of Rs. 7,000/- per month for her and her two minor children, the court below will first hear the wife on the maintenance aspect and pass orders therein. After passing the order on application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. the court below will proceed in the matter after giving the petitioner another opportunity of cross-examination. It is clarified that if the petitioner/wife fails to appear before the court below on 8.10.2010, the court below is free to pass any such or further orders. For this reason, the orders dated 7.9.2010 and 22.9.2010 are set aside. With these observations, writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 29.9.2010 Kuldeep