- (1.) G. S. N. Tripathi, J. Heard Sri Nasiruzzaman, learned Advocate for the revisionist and perused the order dated 4-10-96 as well as the objection filed by the revisionist on 15-12-94.
(2.) IN his objection dated 15-12-94, in paragraph 2, the revisionist Banney Khan had specifically alleged that he had divorced his wife, opposite party on 12-6-93 and sent a notice with regard to this fact. After notice has been served, more than 3 months have expired (that is Iddat period is over ). Ac cording to Muslim Law, the revisionist is not liable to maintain his wife beyond that period. This specific question of divorce has not been decided by the learned Family Judge, Agra and he has proceeded to pass an order without giving any finding on this point. Therefore the order is illegal ex facie and liable to be quashed. The order impugned dated 4-10-96 passed by the learned Family Court, Agra is set aside. The matter is remanded to the same Court to specifically decide as to whether the marriage between the parties has been dissolved by giving a notice of Talaq, as alleged by Banney Khan. There after, the learned Family Court, Agra shall proceed according to law. Meanwhile, proceedings for recovery against the revisionist shall remain stayed. Parties shall appeal before the learned Family Court, Agra on 26-11-96.
(3.) A copy of the order shall be given to the learned counsel for the revisionist on payment of usual charges. Order accordingly. .;