1. Today when the matter is called out in the first session, learned advocate appearing for the applicant requested to keep the matter for hearing in the second session. In the second session, again learned advocate Ms.Sneha Patel appearing for learned advocate Mr.Mitul Desai for the applicant requests for time on the ground that learned advocate Mr.Mitul Desai is busy in Sessions Court at Gandhinagar.
2. This matter was listed for hearing on 16.7.2012, the Court passed following order.
"Ms.P.J.Joshi, learned advocate appearing for respondent no.2 wife, submitted that the applicant has not paid any amount towards maintenance awarded by the Trial Court and enhanced by the Revisional Court. When the matter is called out twice, the learned advocate for the applicant is not present. Hence, the matter is adjourned to 19.7.2012."
3. It appears that learned advocate appearing for the applicant-husband who has been directed to pay Rs.4,000/- per month towards the alimony to the respondent - wife and now enhanced to Rs.7,000/- per month by order dated 23.2.2012 passed below Exh.12, is not proceeding with the matter without paying any alimony to the respondent No.2.
4. In absence of learned advocate for the applicant, the Court could have proceeded with the matter ex-parte. However, in the interest of justice, the matter is adjourned to 20th August, 2012, directing the applicant to deposit an amount of Rs.50,000/- on or before the next date of hearing. If the learned advocate does not remain present on the next date of hearing, and if he fails to deposit the aforesaid amount, the Court will proceed with the matter in accordance with law.
Direct service is permitted to the learned advocates appearing for the parties.
( A.J. DESAI, J. ) syed/ Top