J-i-l^ sliI-E B£N5H IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH ^ WRITPETITION (C) N0. - ^%9 OF 2006 PETITIONER •-h gjBf. \^...-<^ J.-!)^^'";. ^•'•^ cy.- t-""^'*is"^^-f:"" ..&-'•' Jainarayan Kesharwani S/o Jhabbu Lal Kesharwani aged about 32 years, Resident of - Tilda, Police Station- Newra, , District- Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENT Smt. Rajni Kesharwani, aged about 28 years, W/o Jainarayan Kesharwani, D/o Bhagwat Kesharwani, Resident of - Village- Dhanpuri, Police Station- Dhanpuri, District- Shahdol (M.P.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 2270FTHE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA XI-HC-78 3^'<ii<<iw<i, atflwis, ftciiyy *ii*ini a>*iiqi t->C(E?^ l^, ^200 lifl 4ach (t^33^^) 3f)^T?iTR-fi* (W 311^1 sb*l[+ L_ ?^<nw^(T3nSsT E.1.S Shri Shivendu Pandya, Hsard. : By this petition under Artich j^etitioner has questioned the leg4 115.2.2006 (Annexure P-1) passed Family CourS, Raipur whereby lsari| lallowed the appiication of t'ne respon| {-iindu Marriage Act,1955 and dir{ trespondent Rs.1,000/- per month leach date of hearina for coming frdrri ^owards cost of iiiigation. The main grievance of the pe( |herein in reply to the application oft| 124 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 195' aiready paying Rs.1 ,QOO/'- as rnainl Ipursuancs of the order dated 26:4.2(1 lass, B'jrhar. butwhite passing thel been considered by the 2" Additional t have perused the impugne^ the fact of grant of Rs.1,000/- as Magistrate, Burhar in favour of resdond by the 2" Additlonal Principal Jydg| iilegal and liabie to be set-aside on 1^1: Therefors, this petition is di^j without issuing notice to the respon(|i' issuance of notice wiil unnecessarij) Advoe^te 'for the petitioner. qii<<tci4l-< iw<iYffte^<Ri<-ii< ^iSlf^TSn^T 227 of the Constitution of india the ity & correctness of the order dated |by the 2 Additional Principal Judge, ^ed 2 Additional Principal Jua'ge has Ident herein fiied underSection 24 ofthe scted the petitloner herein to pay to |s maintenance aiiowance, Rs.500/- on iurhar to Raipur as aiso Rs.2,000/- itioner is that even though the petitioner ie respondent herejn fiied under Sect'on |S specificaiiy raised a plea that he is lenance ailowance to the respondent in 33 pass-ed by the Judiciai Magistrate 1 imDuaned order the said amount has not PrinciDal Judge.. ' - order and from the order It Is ciear that ma'.nten.ance allowance by the Judicial londent herein has not been considered ^, As such, impugned order is ex-facie iis groynd oniy. pposed of at the admsssion stags itself ient because the order is ex-facie il'egal, delay the disposai of this petition and P.T.O. XI-HC-78 Sn^T^iTRHi't) OTT an^r giiiNi .-L 3:5^'<(l<llct<<, ESTnu'IS, Rldlti^ *11*1MI Sh*ll<sh ^ 200 31T^?T Tg^? (yit^sK^ff) ?t<iraTflfg(T3(I^T -<z-' ths respondent shal! be put to that if the respondent stii! fesis| to move an application for revie'l' in the circumstances, fcli 15.2.2006 (Annexure P-1) pas^ Family Court, Raipur is hereb't Judge is dlrected to decide t^" under Section 24 of the Hin|du consideration the order dated 3S Surhar v.'hereby the said M^; aiiowance of Rs.1,000/- per mofith Wlth the dlrection aforesfci Consequently, M.CuV.)P. nldu qiiifa'fl-i iiiiiTfftec^<Ri«i< ^sri^iTsn^r lunnecessary cost. However, it is made ciear |aggrieved by this order, she wili be at liberty iV/recall ofthis order. e petition is a!low®d,impugned order dated ed by iearned 2 Additional Principal Judge, / set aside and the 2 Additionai Principal s appiication of the respondent herein fi'ed du Marriage Act, 1955 afresh taking into [6.4.2003 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Igistrate has aiready granted maintenance to the respondent herein. id, the petitionstands disposed of. No.4973/06 a!so stand dtsposed of. Sd/- Ag. Chief Justice P.T.O. <3<