Modi, J.—This is an application filed by Mst. Mukan Kanwar for grant of alimony pending the decision of the appeal filed by her against the judgment of the learned District Judge by which he annulled the petitioners marriage with the respondent Ajit Chand.

2. The contention of the learned counsel as raised by him during the course of arguments before me is that the order dated the 19th March, 1958, passed by a learned single Judge in the petitioners revision against the order of the learned District Judge refusing her alimony pending the proceeding in the trial court vide Mukan Kanwar vs. Ajeet Chand (1) stands, and that his client is entitled to receive the same alimony pending the decision of the appeal. Learned counsel argues that the appeal filed by his client is nothing bur a continuation of the suit, and, therefore, the order made in the pendency of the suit automatically enures for the duration of the appeal also. In support of his submission, learned counsel has drawn my attention to the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Annapurnamma vs. Ramakrishna (2). I may state at once that this case offers no parallel to the case before me inasmuch as the wife there had not

Click Here to Read the rest of this document