SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Anup Kumar vs Smt. Reena Alias Renu on 14 March, 2019

1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CR No. 150/2019

(Anup Kumar vs. Smt. Reena alias Renu)

Jabalpur, Dated: 14.03.2019.

Shri Sourabh Singh Thakur, learned counsel for the

petitioner.

Shri Anubhav Jain, learned counsel for the respondent.

This civil revision has been filed by the petitioner

aggrieved by an Order (Annexure-F) dated 05.12.2018

passed in H.M.No.33/2017 by Ist Addl. District Judge, Rehli,

District-Sagar whereby maintenance pendente lite of

Rs.5,000/- per month was allowed to the respondent on an

application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage

Act,1955.

Learned counsel for the respondent has raised an

objection regarding the maintainability of this civil revision.

Reliance is placed on an order of Division Bench of this

Court passed on 30.09.2015 in First Appeal No.

118/2015 (Sailesh Mishra vs. Vibha Tiwari) wherein the

Division Bench has held thus :-

“Against such order, neither an appeal under
sub-section (1) of section 19 nor a revision
under sub-section (4) thereof, shall lie. The
only remedy available to an aggrieved party
against such interlocutory order is to
challenge the same by filing a writ petition
2
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CR No. 150/2019

(Anup Kumar vs. Smt. Reena alias Renu)

under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India.”

On the other hand, learned counsel for the

petitioner has placed reliance on an order dated

26.10.2016 passed by another Division Bench of this

Court in F.A.No.764/2015 (Prafull Kumar vs. Smt.

Asha) wherein relying on the judgment passed in case

of Raghvendra Singh Choudhary vs. Smt. Seema

Bai reported in AIR 1989 MP 259, the Division Bench

has observed that order for interim maintenance passed

in a proceeding under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage

Act,1955 affects the rights of the parties substantially

and, thus, it cannot be treated as an interlocutory order,

and First Appeal against that order is maintainable.

In the circumstances and looking to the conflict

between the two Division Bench decisions of this Court

referred to above, let this matter be placed before My

Lord Hon’ble the Chief Justice on administrative side for
3
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CR No. 150/2019

(Anup Kumar vs. Smt. Reena alias Renu)

constitution of an appropriate Bench for decision on the

following issues :-

“(i) Whether an order passed under Section 24
of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 would be an
interlocutory order so that it will not be covered
under the meaning of
Section 19(1) of the
Family Courts Act, 1984 ?

(ii) Whether against an order passed under
Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, a
petition under
Article 227 of the Constitution of
India or an appeal under
Section 19(1) of the

Family Courts Act, 1984, would be available ?”

(Nandita Dubey)
JUDGE
jitin

Digitally signed by JITIN KUMAR
CHOURASIA
Date: 2019.03.20 10:34:39 +05’30’

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2019 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh