Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 419 (PAT)

Raj Dhari Devi v. Jawaharlal

2004-04-12

V.N.SINHA

body2004
Judgment 1. The delay in filing of this civil revision application is condoned. 2. This revision application is directed against the order dated 30.5.02 passed by the District Judge, Bhojpur, Ara in Divorce case no. 23 of 2000 whereunder petition of opposite party (wife) under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956 has been rejected. During hearing of the petition Sri Gopal Mishra appeared for the wife and Sri Samrendra Pratap Singh for the husband. Both the counsel agreed before me that so far interim maintenance and litigation costs are concerned, wife shall be paid Rs. 10,000/- towards arrears of maintenance for the period 5.7.2000 to 12.4.2004 and thereafter until disposal of divorce suit wife shall be paid Rs. 1000/-per month as maintenance including litigation cost. This arrangement disposes of the maintenance matter. 3. Perusal of the impugned order however indicates that the court below having considered the evidence of the witnesses examined on behalf of the husband concluded that during the pendency of the divorce suit wife has entered into 2nd marriage with one Ram Dular Ram. The said finding has been recorded in the impugned order only on the basis of the evidence led by the husband. Counsel for the wife categorically stated that till date none has been examined as a witness on her behalf. In that view of the matter the finding in the impugned order regarding second marriage should be taken as tentative. Final order in regard to the second marriage of the wife Raj Dhani Devi should be recorded at the time of disposal of the divorce case after giving her opportunity to examine as many witnesses as she desires. 4. This civil revision application is disposed in the light of the observations/ directions made above. 5. It is made clear that before disposal of the divorce suit entire amount of maintenance as agreed to between counsel for the parties should be paid to the wife and thereafter only disposal of the case should be recorded. As the divorce matter is pending for the last four years as such it is expedient in the interest of justice that the same should be disposed of as early as possible but only after giving ample opportunity to the wife to examine her witnesses.