an^rqnfiFfw WT 3TI^?T SiDWD •\:. 7^ •<11<<M<), 0Ti1<1'l<o, filCll'My "qra^ITWiraT"""""""""" '"""""""" ""W^. 200 3II^?r'tRW (1j2^<(^) wnw ^fta SII^H ••w- SB : HON'BLB fiBUS JUSTK^ WP (2271 a<>. 2S79 0»2008 PetdUaat»/ Ri»ponAi?at VCTSUt resi(ond 8.8.2008 SIiri Bharat Rajput, The petitioner by the i( order of Aiuiexure P/l wl( Principal Judge, Fainity application of the maintenance and awarded the respondent. Leanied counsel for petitioner in his repty maintenance has eabegcn'icaf his wife. However, fhe Ct; Do yxjcafty ^raferat'i 'Hpr^iV ^f fe^ ^r-t^K ^i'aflwsn^r DHIREHDRA MISUBRA Hemant Kzimar Jaade, S/o SIui Kaiiial Singh Jat^ie, ayed about 29 ycars, R/o Bhcndra, Tah. Kurud, Distt Dhamtari (CG) Smt Shaida Jaay&e, W/o IIexnant Kuinar Jaade, aged about 27 yeara, R/o Blieadra, Tah. Kinzid, DistL Dhamten (CGt cc|uuasel for (he petitioner. ifistant petition has impugned fhe nrl^ereby the leamed I Additional (jSourt, Raipi.iT has aHowed flie si(ondent/appUGant for interim siun of Rs.1000/- per month to ffae petitioner submlts that the fhe appfication for interim denied Itoat Ifae respondeat is )iirt below has orSered interim -HC—78 an^['mft:fw WIT an^l **<i+ -<< > II ^f ••^-' ^ss '^ww^, ®Til'M'i<o,fsidi'yy *ii*idi ^*tra» W^ 200 sn^i'T^? ('^3^'?) ^WKiTC tif?d STI^T maintenance wifhout there the respondent is hls legalty piiamed wife ^ietag any evideace before it that I have heard leainedl perused the tapugned order respon<|ent fect Leamed Famity Coiirt| respondent/appUcant wheTe|in tfae wife ofthe petiticaier anc| made in fhe cominiimly me^tii by fhe petitloneT in hi^ maintenance to the month as it is an admitted Rs.5,000/- per month. It ^s was himself absent on th4 interun maintenance was det: there is no Ulegalily, iitfir committed by the Court 1}< exercise of jurisdiction Indla. Accordmgly, the deserves to be disinissed atl hereby dfemissed. tT))«lTci<l1lITWcff ^^^ <rai<?$l< ^aifimsd^r counsel for the petitioner and |consideriiig the pleading^ of ttie she has claimed herself to be also considerii^ the compromise ^tfng, which has not beexi denled reply, has granted interiin at fte rate of Rs.1,000/- pCT that salaiy of the petttioner is js also evident fhat the petitioner date when the applicatton for ;ided. In this view of fhe inatter, tfirmily or jurisdietional en~or dow warrantmg interfa?raice in Article 227 of Constitution of being devoid oS substance |the adiaission stage itself and is undlsr pe|U.tion Sd/- DhirendraMishra Judge