- (1.) Facts giving rise to this petition under Section 115 of the code of Civil Procedure are that the petition filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act., 1955, by Bishan Dass against his wife Jai Devi, seeking dissolution of their marriage by decree of divorce, was allowed by the District Judge, Faridkot on January 27, 1978.In this consent decree it was further agreed that Bishan Dass would pay monthly maintenance of Rs. 100/- to Jai Devi till she re-marries, Accordingly, the District Judge exercising power under Section 25 of the Act passed on order. Upon the failure of Bishan Dass to pay maintenance, Jai Devi took out execution.The objections raised by Bishan Dass gave rise to the following issues :- 1. Whether the pay of the Judgment-debtor is not liable to attachment?
(2.) Whether the order fixing maintenance, is illegal and without jurisdiction ? 2. The learned District Judge decided issue, No. 1 in favour of Jai Devi and she was held entitled to 2 /3rd of the monthly basic salary of Rs. 132/- of Bishan Dass. As issue No. 2 was decided in favour of Bishan Dass, her execution application was dismissed. Hence this revision petition.
(3.) Learned counsel for the parties have addressed me only on the decision of the District Judge on Issue No. 2 A perusal of the impugned judgment shows that the learned District Judge was influenced by the fact that Jai Devi did not make any application under Section 25 of the Act for grant of maintenance in her favour. Thus he formed the view that the decree passed by his learned predecessor being illegal and without jurisdiction was in executable sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the Act is in the following terms:-- (1) Any Court exercising jurisdiction under this Act may, at the time of passing any decree or at any time sub-sequent thereto on application made to the if for the purpose by either the wife or the husband as the case may be order that the respondent shall, pay to the applicant for her or his maintenance and support such gross sum or such monthly or periodical sum for a terms not exceeding the lie of the applicant as having regard to the respondents own income and other property, if any, the income and other property of the applicant the conduct of the parties and other circumstances of the case it may seem to the court to be just, and any such payment may be secured, if necessary, by a charge on the immovable property of the respondents.;