The interest of justice requires that parties are not denied an opportunity to contest the matter on merits. Technicalities cannot be allowed to stand in the way of justice.

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Heard.

2. ADMIT. Taken up for final disposal by consent of the learned Advocates for the parties.

3. In this revision application, challenge is to the judgment and order dated 28.01.2022, whereby the petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of maintenance made by the non-applicant/wife bearing Petition No. E-194/2016 was allowed by the learned Judge of Family Court No.2, Nagpur.

4. The applicant/husband was the respondent and the non- applicant/wife was the petitioner before the Family Court. In this judgment, the parties would be referred by their nomenclature before the Family Court.

5. The petitioner and the respondent got married on 05.07.2010. The petitioner pleaded that after marriage, the respondent made demand of Rupees One lakh. The parents of the petitioner could not pay the amount. The petitioner was, therefore, subjected to ill-treatment and torture. She was finally driven out of the house by the respondent. It is further stated that in order to preserve the marriage, the amount of Rupees One lakh was paid by cheques. Despite encashing the cheques, the ill-treatment went unabated. The petitioner, therefore, claimed maintenance @ Rs.20,000/- per month.

6. The respondent/husband filed the reply and opposed the petition. He denied the material allegations. It is his case that one Mr. Pradeep Padlamwar had borrowed money from him. He, therefore, repaid his debt by giving two cheques to the respondent. There was no demand of money as alleged. There was no ill-treatment or torture as alleged. In short, it was his case that the petitioner was not entitled to get any maintenance from him for the reason that the petitioner on her own left the matrimonial home.

7. The petitioner filed her affidavit of examination-in-chief. The respondent remained absent and failed to cross-examine her. The cross-examination was, therefore, treated as closed. The petitioner examined her brother and one more witness Dr. Istakhar Ahmed. On an application made by the petitioner, pending petition the respondent was ordered and directed vide order dated 25.04.2017 to pay interim maintenance to the petitioner @ Rs.4,000/- per month from the date of the application.

8. The respondent made first application (Exh.54) on 19.06.2018 and sought permission to cross-examine the petitioner and witnesses by setting aside the order of closing his cross-examination. The learned Judge of the Family Court allowed the application with a condition that the respondent shall clear all the arrears till then. The respondent did not clear the arrears and therefore, missed the opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses. Thereafter, he again made application (Exh.57) on 10.02.2020 seeking same relief. The learned Judge granted the application with the same condition. The respondent did not comply the order and therefore, he missed the opportunity. He made third application (Exh.63) on 07.07.2021 for the same relief. The learned Judge rejected the said application on the ground that despite giving assurance, the respondent failed to comply the orders.

9. Learned Judge of the Family Court, on the basis of the evidence of the petitioner and two independent witnesses, vide impugned order, quantified the monthly maintenance @ Rs.8,000/-. It is to be noted that the interim maintenance was quantified at Rs.4,000/- per month from the date of the application/petition. Learned advocate for the respondent submits across the bar that till date, the respondent has deposited Rs.1,47,000/-. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that as per the instructions of the petitioner, the respondent has deposited only Rs.1,28,000/-. It is to be noted that this Court from 09.06.2022 granted stay to the execution of the impugned order, subject to the condition that the respondent shall clear the entire arrears of the maintenance awarded as per the final order of the Family Court and continue to deposit maintenance @ Rs.4,000/- per month. It is to be note