Sapna Garg vs Nahar Chand

S.P. Bangarh, J.—The civil appeal No. 30-A/25.04.2012 of the petitioner, herein, has been pending before the Additional District Judge, Bathinda, that has been filed by the petitioner, herein, challenging, therein, the judgment and decree dated 20.08.2011 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Bathinda in Civil Suit No. 33 of 24.02.2011 RT 679 of 31.07.2003, whereby, the suit of the respondent, herein, was decreed for possession of the suit land and preliminary decree was ordered to be passed. During the pendency of the appeal, IBID, the petitioner, herein, filed application (Annexure P-2) before the trial Court to the effect that a divorce petition was filed by her husband, that was allowed wrongly and illegally by the District Judge vide judgment and decree dated 05.05.2005.

Aggrieved, against the same, she has filed FAO No. 132-M of 2005 before this Court, that is still pending for adjudication. It has been further averred in the application that in the divorce case when her maintenance amount was fixed by the Court, then her husband had taken a plea that she (petitioner, herein) is already having a place of residence in the suit house and on consideration of this prayer of the husband of the petitioner, a very less amount of maintenance was fixed.

It has been further averred that the appeal is in continuation of suit and, therefore, till the disposal of the appeal i.e. FAO No. 132-M of 2005, the proceedings of the appeal may be stayed, as the subject matter in dispute involved in the appeal is directly connected and dependant upon the decision of this Court in FAO, IBID. Consequently, it was prayed that proceedings of the appeal before the Appellate Court may be stayed till the decision of this Court in FAO No. 132-M of 2005.

This application was dismissed vide order dated 28.10.2013 (Annexure P-3). Aggrieved, thereagainst, the petitioner, who is appellant before the Appellate Court has come up in this revision with prayer for acceptance, thereof, and for acceptance of his application of stay of hearing of the appeal, that has been dismissed by the Appellate Court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that till the final adjudication of the appeal i.e. FAO No. 132-M of 2005, the proceedings before the Appellate Court may be stayed, but he failed to point any provision of law, whereunder, the proceedings of the appeal could be stayed, as the matter in issue in the appeal and the matter in issue in the FAO are not the same. The case of the petitioner, is, thus, not covered within the ambit of Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. So, the order of the Appellate Court was wholly justified in dismissing the application of the petitioner, herein, for stay of the proceedings of the appeal, till the disposal of the FAO ibid by this Court.

Confronted, with this situation, the petitioner, herein, contended that the dispute involved in the appeal is a family dispute. The petitioner, herein, is the daughter-in-law of the respondent in the appeal and decree of divorce has been granted against her at the instance of the son of the respondent, who is her husband. He further contended that the case may be referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre at Bathinda for amicably resolving the dispute between the parties.

Regarding, this contention, suffice, it to say, that the Appellate Court, at the first step will make its effort to get the matter amicably resolved by referring the matter in appeal to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre at Bathinda. If the mediation fails, then it shall proceed, according to law. Resultantly, the instant revision fails and is, hereby, dismissed with no order, as to costs, sans prejudice to the merits of this case.