Vinay Kumar Vs. Smt. Mithileshbai - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- madhya pradesh nagar tatha gram nivesh adhiniyam (23 of 1973)section 50(4) proviso (as inserted by act of 2004): [dipak misra, krishna kumar lahoti & rajendra menon, jj] preparation of town development scheme proviso prescribing time limit held, object of amendment is to remove hardship caused to citizens and to provide time limit to consider objections and suggestion and to provide a deeming clause so that the authority would act in quite promptitude. proviso unequivocal, categorical and unambiguous and does not permit any other kind of construction but a singular one. section 50 (4) proviso (as inserted by act of 2004): [dipak misra, krishn kumar lahoti & rajendra menon, jj] preparation of town development scheme held, proviso is not retrospective. scheme already finalised will not lapse and has to be completed within the time span provided under proviso. no vested right accrues in favour of authority on commencement of process of preparation of scheme, which cannot be impaired by introducing proviso. section 50(4) proviso (as inserted by act of 2004): [dipak misra, krishn kumar lahoti & rajendra menon, jj] preparation of town development scheme held, proviso uses the term shall be deemed to have lapsed. it does not convey that scheme gets automatically lapsed. n.p. singh, j.1. this revision application is directed against the order dated 25.8.1994 as also order dated 27.9.1994 passed by the 6th addl. district judge, durg camp. bemetra, in civil suit no. 4a/93.2. by order dated 25.8.1994 it was held that the prayer for grant of maintenance allowance under section 24 of the hindu marriage act can be considered before the w.s. filed by the wife, and by order dated 27.9.1994, the non-applicant/ wife was granted interim maintenance allowance to rs. 400/-, rs. 500/- as lawyer fees and rs. 1000/- towards the litigation expenses. the interim maintenance allowance was ordered to be paid to the non-applicant/wife from 24.12.1993, the date of the filing of the application under section 24 of the hindu marriage act for grant of interim maintenance allowance.3. the applicant/husband has filed an application under section 13 of the hindu marriage for dissolution of his marriage with the non-applicant, his wife by decree of divorce, on the ground that she was living as adultery. pursuant to the notice, the non-applicant appeared and moved an application under section 24 of the hindu marriage act for grant of interim maintenance allowance. ground of hardship in maintaining herself, and the prayer was allowed by the learned addl. district judge, durg by the impugned order.4. shri s.l. kochar counsel for the applicant has contended that the impugned order has been passed without holding any inquiry. the non-applicant/wife is admittedly, in the service of gas agency. she has also mining lease and agricultural land, and therefore, she was not entitled for any interim maintenance allowance.5. admittedly, the non-applicant is the legally wedded wife of the applicant. section 24 of the hindu marriage act provides grant of interim maintenance allowance to the aggrieved pending disposal of the case, therefore, i do not find any infirmity in the order granting interim maintenance allowance to the non-applicant.6. it, however, appears that the trial judge passed the order for grant of interim maintenance allowance, from the date of filing of the application under section 24 of the hindu marriage act, but no reason has been assigned for directing the payment of interim maintenance allowance from the date of the application.7. the maintenance allowance is normally granted from the date of the order. a special reason is, however, required to be recorded for granting maintenance allowance from the date of the filing of the application.8. in the instant case, no special reason has been assigned by the trial judge for granting the interim maintenance allowance to the non-applicant from the date of the filing of the application under section 24 of the hindu marriage act.9. the impugned order to this extent, cannot be sustained. it is modified, and the petition is disposed of accordingly.