JUDGMENT - R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR, J.:---Heard learned Advocate for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the respondent No. 10-State.

2. None present for the respondents No. 1 to 9 though served.

3. Perused the records.

4. The petitioners challenge the order dated 17-7-1992 passed by the Magistrate and confirmed by the revisional Court by order dated 22-12-1992. The learned Magistrate has declared the proceedings for execution of the order of maintenance to have been abated on account of the death of the husband of the petitioner No. 1 placing reliance upon the decision in the matter of (Ambadas Bajirao v. Annapurna Bai)1, reported in A.I.R. 1953 Nagpur 248. The impugned judgment is sought to be challenged by the petitioners and the learned Advocate for the petitioners placing reliance upon the decision of the Punjab Haryana High Court in the matter of (Prithviraj Singh v. Pavanvir Kaur)2, reported in 1986 Cri.L.J. 1432 has contended that the courts below have failed to consider as to whether the estate of the deceased could have been burdened to the extent of the order of grant of maintenance was sought to be executed till the death of the husband of the p

Click Here to Read the rest of this document