MADANLAL BHAGIRATH Vs. POONIBAI RAOHAKISAN
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) THIS appeal arises out of an order passed under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, (hereinafter called the Act), awarding Rs. 100/- as expenses of litigation and Rs. 30/- p. m. as maintenance pendente lite to the respondent.
(2.) THE appellant filed an application under section 10 of the Act for a decree of judicial separation against the respondent wife. In these proceedings, the respondent submitted an application under section 24 of the Act for an order of maintenance pendente lite and for expenses of litigation. It was on this application that the order under appeal was passed.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the respondent raised a preliminary objection that under section 28 of the Act an order under section 24 would not be appealable. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that on this question there is a conflict of opinion amongst the various High Courts. The High Courts of Orissa, Madras, Gujarat, Madhya pradesh, Calcutta and Punjab have taken the view that an order under section 24 is appealable under section 28 of the Act; whereas the High Courts of bombay and Andhra Pradesh are of the view that an order under section 24 is not appealable. In a later decision, a Full Bench of the Andhra Pradesh high Court has in Kutumba Rao v. Sesharatnamamba (AIR 1967 A P 323.) overruled an earlier andhra Pradesh decision and held that an order under section 24 is appealable under section 28 of the Act.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.