Decided on May 25,2007

Jitender Kumar Jauhar Appellant
Anupama Jauhar Respondents


S.MURALIDHAR,J. - (1.) THESE two matrimonial appeals are directed against the judgment dated 16.12.2004 passed by the Additional District Judge, Delhi ("ADJ") in H.M.A. No 712-A/04/96. By the impugned judgment the learned ADJ partly allowed the said petition for divorce filed by Shri Jitender Kumar Jauhar (the respondent in Mat. Appeal No 6 of 2005 and the appellant in Mat Appeal No 8 of 2005) and held that the marriage between the parties which took place on 12.5.1963 should be dissolved on the ground of desertion.
(2.) AGGRIEVED by the said judgment, Smt. Anupama Jauhar has filed Mat. Appeal No. 6 of 2005. To the extent that the impugned judgment holds that the petitioner failed to prove that the respondent treated him with cruelty, Shri Jitender Kumar Jauhar has filed the first mentioned appeal being Mat. Appeal No 8 of 2005. In addition to filing her appeal, Smt. Anupama Jauhar filed an application being CM No. 3681 of 2005 under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 ("Act") seeking maintenance of Rs. 1 lakh per month as interim maintenance from the date of filing of the present appeal along with Rs. 50,000/- on account of litigation expenses. Even while the said application was pending, Smt. Anupama Jauhar filed another application, being CM No 7373 of 2006, seeking a direction to Shri Jitender Kumar Jauhar to pay Rs. 20,000/- per month as pendente lite maintenance till such time the CM No. 3681 of 2005 was decided. By an order dated 16.10.2006 this Court allowed the CM No. 7373 of 2006 and directed Shri Jitender Kumar Jauhar to pay Smt. Anupama Jauhar pendente lite maintenance of Rs. 20,000/- per month from 7.12.2005 onwards, till the decision in CM No. 3681 of 2005. A review application being R.A. No. 428 of 2006 filed by Shri Jitender Jauhar against this order was disposed of on 18.12.2006 with the clarification that the observations made in the order dated 16.10.2006 would not affect the final determination of the pending appeals on merits. Two other pending applications in two appeals were disposed of.
(3.) FOR the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to according to their respective positions before the trial Court. Accordingly, Shri Jitender Kumar Jauhar will be referred to as the petitioner and Smt. Anupama Jauhar as the respondent.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.