Parvez Ansari (None) 16 May 2015

Order after order

Dear Experts, please have your valuable advice ...

My friends wife filed a DV case against him. Her interim application got disposse off in Mar 13, where Magistrate gave order that "As complainant has not pressed application since long, the application is dispossed off".

Later she filed fresh application for same relief and got order in absence of the Respondents on April 14.

Later Respondent reached 5 min later on the same day and objected and requested for stay for 2 weeks. Magistrate asked say of other side and matter went on for another year. Repondent brought to notice of court that order had been already passed in Mar 13 and as such Magistrate adjourned the case for evidence thrice. However, later one day on April 15, Magistrate passed order that any application of Respondent after the April 14 order is not maintenable and hence order of April 14 be reinstitiated.

My question is

1) Whether the Applicant can file again interim application again after the Magistrate gave order that interim application is dispossed off?

2) Is there a difference between order of being disposed off and rejected ?

3) If the order is passed in absence of Respondent and Respondent reaches 5 min later and files his say, then whether this order is stayed or not.

4) Order passed and not executed for a year. Is there any bar of time on the order stalled for time ?

Reply Follow

4 Replies

Parvez Ansari (None) 16 May 2015

I shall add one more question.

5) What is meant for adjourned for evidence. If Magistrate puts the matter for evidence, can he still pass order on applications by Complainants ?

srinivasan.r. (Lawyer, 9444000813) 17 May 2015

If upon receipt of an application from the aggrieved person, the Magistrate is satisfied that the circumstances so require, he may alter, modify or revoke an order after recording the reasons in writing, 2.Absolutely there is no bar. 3. You are suppose to adduce evidence from your side you have failed so order was confirmed by Magistrate.

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Advocate) 18 May 2015

Attending the court late by 5 minutes cannot be claimed as an excuse for an adverse order against the party. The orders if passed against the respondent shall have a relief only in revision in higher court and not in the same court. Therefore it is not understood that how the trial court has accepted a petition to review its decision and the same was pending for one year. Whether you are making the points clear or missing out any statements in between is also not known. Also, once a court has passed an order for payment of interim maintenance, it becomes the duty of the person to pay the same against whom the orders were passed. Further, as the case is going on, she is entitled to claim maintenance from the date of order or from the date of application as the orders specify along with the arrears as on this date.

You can clarify all these issues with your own advocate who will be a better person to explain the position and circumstances of the case.

Parvez Ansari (None) 20 May 2015

Dear Sir,

As said earlier first order was passed dispossing off interim application.

Then court entertained a fresh application of the Complainant on same reliefs and passed order in absence of respondent.

Then respondent applied for stay of the order.

The court asked say of other party on the application of the respondent for stay

Then when respondent raised contention that initially order was passed to dispose off the application then this court has no jurisdiction to entertain order.

Court realized this and asked parties to lead their evidence. i.e noted in roznama "adjourned for evidence" on three dates.

However later court passed order that the order passed second time has to be exeuted and application for stay is nomaintenable.

Now we have challenged and the oder in session court for stay on above ground that once the order is disposed off it should not be re-orderd.

What are our chances?

Is ther any citation?