FAO No. M-62 of 2008 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No. M-62 of 2008 Date of decision: 22.07.2009 Rajbir ....Appellant Versus Mamta Devi ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA Present: - Mr. Rajinder Mathur, Advocate, for Mr. R.N. Lohan, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. R.S. Longia, Advocate, for the respondent. ***** VINOD K. SHARMA, J (ORAL) CM No. 10176-CII of 2009 Petition filed by the appellant-husband seeking decree of divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, was ordered to be dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Ambala. The appellant had sought decree of divorce on ground of cruelty. However, the learned Matrimonial Court dismissed the petition, on failure of appellant to prove allegations of cruelty. The appellant preferred appeal against the judgment and decree, which was ordered to be admitted on 30.9.2008 by this Court. FAO No. M-62 of 2008 (O&M) -2- On application moved by the respondent-wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, this Court on 14.1.2009 passed the following order: - “On consensual basis, it is ordered that the respondent – wife shall be entitled to maintenance pendente lite @ Rs.1,500/- per month. Besides it, she is also entitled to a sum of Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses.” The appellant has failed to comply with the order and has not paid any amount towards maintenance or litigation expenses. The respondent-wife has moved this application for striking of the defence of the appellant, in view of the non-compliance of the order passed by this Court. Notice of the application was given. Learned counsel for the appellant states, that the appellant is not in a position to pay the maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses, as fixed by this Court. This plea of the learned counsel for the appellant cannot be accepted, as the order was passed on consensual basis and there is no reason for the appellant to disobey the said order. For non-compliance of the order of maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses, the defence of the appellant deserves to be struck off. The C.M. is allowed and the defence of the appellant is ordered to be struck off. FAO No. M-62 of 2008 In view of order passed in C.M. No. 10176 of 2009, striking FAO No. M-62 of 2008 (O&M) -3- off the defence of the appellant, this appeal is dismissed. However, this shall not bar respondent wife to execute the order passed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. (Vinod K. Sharma) Judge July 22, 2009 R.S.