M RAMACHANDRA RAO Vs. M S KOWSALYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is presented by a husband whose application for restitution of conjugal rights under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act was stopped by the Civil Judge when the husband committed default in the payment of arrears of maintenance of Rs.1,000/- payable to the wife under the order of the Court.

(2.) Mr. Yoga Narasimha appearing for the husband contended that if the husband neglected to pay the arrears of maintenance all that was possible was the recovery of payment in execution proceedings and that the Civil Judge had no power to stop further proceedings in the matter relating to the application for restitution of conjugal rights. I do not agree. When the Civil Judge made a direction that the husband shall pay the arrears of maintenance, it was his highest duty to insist upon obedience to that direction. If there was disobedience he had inherent power to stop further proceedings which were commenced by the husband. That was the view taken in Malkan Rani v. Krishnan Kumar, AIR1961 P&H 42 , Anita v. Birendra Chandra, AIR1962 Cal 88 , 65 CWN786 and Bhuvaneshwar Prasad v. Dropta Bai AIR1963 MP 259 , and with the enunciation made in these decisions I respectfully agree.

(3.) So, I dismiss this revision petition with costs.