IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on : 17.02.2025 Date of Decision : 27.02.2025 Love Gogia ... Petitioner(s)

VERSUS Tannu Dua ... Respondent(s)

CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN Present : Petitioner - Love Gogia - in person (through hybrid mode).

ALKA SARIN, J.

1. The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner- husband for seeking removal of the time restriction imposed by this Court vide order dated 22.08.2024 passed in CR-779-2024 and for setting aside the order dated 05.12.2024 whereby the application filed by the petitioner for extending the time for cross-examination of PW1 - Tannu Dua - was dismissed.

2. Facts are being taken from the petition and the annexures as appended with the revision petition. The petitioner and the respondent got married on 08.04.2015. In December 2018 a divorce petition was filed by the respondent-wife and during the pendency of the divorce petition, the respondent-wife approached this Court by filing CR-6636-2023 which was disposed off vide order dated 04.12.2023. In the said CR-6636-2023 the petitioner-husband herein (respondent in CR-6636-2023) appeared through video conferencing. The prayer in the said petition was for expeditious disposal of the petition pending before the Family Court, Faridabad. It was observed in the order dated 04.12.2023, which has been appended as Annexure P-4 with the present revision petition, that the respondent (who is the petitioner-husband herein) was duly heard and he was asked if he was interested in expeditious disposal of thecasepending before the Family Court. However, instead of giving a direct reply he only sought time to file a reply to the revision petition. Vide order dated 04.12.2023 the saidCR-6636-2023was disposed off with a direction to the Family Court to dispose of the case expeditiously by following proper procedure. Thereafter, the petitioner- husband filed CR-779-2024 in this Court to challenge the order dated 20.01.2024 passed by the Family Court as also for further directions to consider the pending applications and objections raised by the petitioner- husband. The said CR-779-2024 was disposed off by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 08.02.2024 (Annexure-P-10).Thereafter,since the petitioner-husband was not cross-examining the witness, the cross- examination of the witness - Tannu Dua - was treated as ‘NIL’by the Family Court vide order dated 09.02.2024.Subsequently, the petitioner-husband filed applications being CM-13984-CII-2024 and CM-4072-2024 in CR-779-2024 to inter-alia challenge the orders dated 09.02.2024 and 20.01.2024 passed by the Family Court. The said applications were disposed off by this Court vide order dated 22.08.2024 the operative part of which reads as under :

“I have heard the rival submissions made by applicant/petitioner and by learned counsel appearing for non-applicant/respondent and have also gone through the case file.

In the order dated 08.02.2024, passed by this Court, the learned Family Court was directed to dispose of the application dated 16.09.2021 in accordance with law, before starting cross-examination of PW-1 Tannu Dua. The applicant-petitioner has submitted that the said order was brought to the notice of the Court but the Court did not bother to consider the same. The said averment of the applicant/petitioner cannot be accepted because no Court is expected to violate the order passed by the higher Court. The Judicial Department is a disciplined Department. Said allegation needs to be ignored. No doubt, the applicant had filed written submissions through e-filing and as per entry made at the Judicial Service Center, the same were filed at 12:40:27 PM on 09.02.2024 after verification. The applicant/ petitioner did not file the submissions directly in the Court and has taken advantage of filing submissions through e-filing. Accordingly, he has also bye-passed the Court.

Keeping in view all the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, lear