I.S. Israni, J. - (1.) It is submitted by Shri P.K. Sharma learned counsel that vide orders dated 22.2.93 the learned Judge, Family Court has consolidated the three executions petitions.
(2.) We have heard the learned counsel and we find that no illegality has been committed by the learned trial Court by consolidating these three execution petitions. However, it was pointed out by Shri Sharma that an application under Section 47 Criminal Procedure Code raising objections to any further payment of maintenance amount was filed around October 92, to which reply has been filed by Mst. Vijay Laxmi. However, no order has been passed on this application. It is submitted by learned counsel that under provisions of Sub-section(3) of section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 the trial court has to decide the objections filed by appellant and modify or rescind the order of Present: maintenance accordingly. This application has not yet been decided whereas the amount of maintenance has been fixed till 10.2.93.
(3.) We do not find any force in the appeal so far as the order of consolidation regarding three execution petitions is concerned. However, the learned trial court is directed to decide the application filed under Section 47 Criminal Procedure Code by applicant Ramesh Chand in accordance with law. In the meantime the appellant shall pay the maintenance amount till the date of filing of the application under Section 47 Criminal Procedure Code. It is only when this maintenance amount is paid to Mst. Vijay Laxmi, the application filed by appellant Ramesh Chand under Section 47 Criminal Procedure Code be decided and thereafter, the order for maintenance amount shall be passed. With this observation the appeal is disposed of.;