AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S.D. Anand, J.—The plea for annulment of marriage filed by the respondent-husband was allowed by the learned Trial Court.
The petitioner-wife challenged that order by filing an FAO before this Court.
The plea u/s 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as ''the Act'') filed by the respondent-husband was allowed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court (Nirmal Singh, J.) on 09.09.2003.
When the amount was not paid, the appellant-wife filed Civil Misc.No. 1086-CII of 2005 to obtain an order of this Court for striking off the defence of the respondent-husband. That Civil Misc. was disposed of by a Coordinate Bench of this Court (Viney Mittal, J.) on 31.01.2006 by ordering that the ascertained arrears shall be payable within a period of one month and in case the arrears are not paid and the maintenance awarded was not paid regularly on or before 10th day of each month, the defence shall be struck off (in case of two consecutive defaults).
While disposing of Civil Misc.No.9562-CII of 2006 on 30.08.2006, a Coordinate Bench of this Court (Hemant Gupta, J.) held that the respondent was in continuous arrears of an amount of Rs. 14,150/- and that he was liable to pay a sum of Rs.1000/- per month thereafter. The respondent-husband was given one month time to pay up the arrears or else his defence would be struck off.
Even then respondent did not comply with the order.
Learned counsel for the appellant-wife raised a pure and simple plea that the pleadings of the respondent-husband ought to be struck off and the petition itself should be dismissed on account of persistent default in paying the arrears till date.
It is apparent from the record that orders dated 09.09.2003, 31.01.2006 and 30.08.2006 did not come to be challenged till date. They have thereby attained finality. None has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent-husband to make a presentation in the context and to thereby indicate whether the arrears have been paid or not. There is no report by the Registry that the arrears have been paid. The learned counsel for the appellant has made a statement at the bar that, as per his instructions, the arrears have not been paid.
In the light thereof, the defence of respondent-husband in the FAO before this Court stands struck off. The net result thereof is that petition itself filed by the respondent/ husband before the Trial Court is deemed to have been dismissed. As a only consequence thereof, the petition filed by the respondent-husband shall stand dismissed on account of the persistent default in paying the arrears of maintenance pendente lite.
In this view of the matter, this Court is not required to go into the (other) merits of the case.