Gokal Chand Mittal, J. - (1.) The parties to the litigation are husband and wife. On 18th Aug., 1980 the husband filed a petition for dissolution of marriage under Sec. 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter called the 'Act'). While that petition was almost at the concluding stage, the wife filed a petition on 20th Jan., 1981 under Sec. 27 of the Act for passing order for disposal for the property like ornaments, utensils, dressing table and other pieces of furniture as detailed in the schedule attached to the application. Notice of that application was given to the husband but in the meantime the main petition for divorce filed by the husband was dismissed on 30th Jan., 1981. The husband filed his reply to the application under Sec. 27 of the Act on 16th Feb., 1981 in which a preliminary objection was raised regarding which issue No. 4 was framed as follows : "Whether the application is liable to be dismissed after the decision of the application under Sec. 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act ?"
(2.) The parties treated the issue to be a legal one and did not adduce evidence. In view of the decision of this Court in Smt. Surinder Kaur Vs. Madan Gopal Singh, AIR 1980 Punjab and Haryana 334, it was concluded by order dated 7th March, 1982 that if a petition under Sec. 27 of the Act is filed during the pendency of any other proceedings under the Act, that can be concluded even beyond the decision of the main petition. Consequently, the preliminary issue was decided in favour of the wife and against the husband and it was ordered that the parties should lead evidence on merit of the case. Against the aforesaid order, the husband came to this Court in this revision.
(3.) The main ground in the revision was that the wife had filed petition under Sec. 27 of the Act after the main proceedings under Sec. 13 of the Act had been concluded. This is so stated in ground No. 3. The learned counsel for the wife has pointed out from the impugned order wherein it is clearly mentioned that the application under Sec. 27 of the Act was filed on 20th Jan., 1981 and that the main petition under Sec. 13 of the Act was decided on 30th Jan., 1981 and that the husband filed reply to petition under Sec. 27 of the Act on 16th Feb., 1981. From the copies of the application and reply, which were with the counsel it is clear that the application under Sec. 27 of the Act was filed before the main divorce petition was decided. Accordingly the ground raised in para 3 is factually wrong.;