MUSLIM ALIAS BHOORA Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) None appears on behalf of the revisionist even when the list is revised. Today is fixed for admission of the Revision. The only ground that has been taken is that the provision of sub-Section (3) of Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 was not followed, as no order was passed within one month from the date of filling of the application and hence the proceeding is bad in law.

(2.) An application was filed by Smt. Khatoon alias Zaitun on 16-12-1987 for allowing maintenance during the Iddat period at the rate of Rs. 500.00 per month, Mahr of Rs. 1000.00 along with the prayer for recovery of the articles or its price mentioned in Schedule 'A' of the petition before the court of the II Munsif Magistrate, Muzaffarnagar and the case was started under Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, directing the revisionist to appear on 15-1-1988 but the revisionist did not attend on that day and the matter was adjourned, ultimately on 23-2-1988 the revisionist appeared in the lower court but no written statement was filed till 26-4-1988 for which cost was imposed.

(3.) A revision was filed for non-compliance of the provision of sub-Section (3), of Section 3 of the said Act bat the same was dismissed on the ground that it was not practicable for the Magistrate to dispose of the application within one month when the revisionist himself took several adjournments and ultimately did not file written statement till 26-4-1988. The learned Judge also held that there is no provision in the law that such reasons should be recorded before expiry of the stipulated period of one month and it should be recorded simultaneously with the disposal of the application after expiry of the said period. Being aggrieved by the said order of the learned Ist Addl. Sessions Judge the instant revision has been filed.