Delhi High Court
Mrs. Purnima Lal vs Shri Udit Agrawal, Ias on 16 July, 2014
Author: Valmiki J. Mehta
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CM(M) 67/2014
% 16th July , 2014
MRS. PURNIMA LAL ......Petitioner
Through: Ms. Vasundhra Singh, Advocate.
VERSUS
SHRI UDIT AGRAWAL, IAS ...... Respondent
Through: Ms. Meenakshi Lekhi, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Harish Pandey,
Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA
To be referred to the Reporter or not?
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)
C.M. No.1192/2014 (exemption)
1. Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.
C.M. stands disposed of.
+ C.M.(M) No.67/2014 and C.M. No.1191/2014 (stay)
2. Powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India are given
so that in extraordinary situations, this power is exercised to prevent clear
cut injustice. Powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India are also
C.M.(M) No.67/2014 Page 1 of 3
normally exercised when there is an order or a judgment which decides an
interim application or the proceedings finally. Against orders of
adjournments or passing of procedural orders which are to enable final
orders being passed on an application which is pending, powers under
Article 227 of Constitution of India are normally not entertained except in
gravest of grave cases.
3. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has
been filed against the impugned order of the court below dated 5.9.2013
which is hearing the divorce petition filed by the respondent herein. In the
divorce petition, an application was filed by the present petitioner/wife for
maintenance. For deciding the amount of maintenance, and taking note that
the present petitioner is working as a Manager in Vodafone, directions were
issued for filing of affidavits and documents so as to determine the financial
capacity of each of the parties to decide the issue of maintenance. It is
against such an order that this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution
of India is filed.
4. I am constrained to note that considerable litigation which
comes up in this roster is completely frivolous litigation, and quite clearly
initiated on wrong advice being given by the lawyers or the litigation is in
the nature of speculation being done by the litigants. It is noted that only if
C.M.(M) No.67/2014 Page 2 of 3
vital rights of the parties are decided then Article 227 can be invoked. In
fact, if a particular order is passed which will decide the issue of
maintenance, the same would be appealable under the provisions of the
Hindu Marriage Act,1955 or if not appealable then provision of Article 227
can be exercised at that stage. But today when there is no final order in an
interim application under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, this petition
under Article 227 of Constitution of India does not lie.
5. In view of the above, this petition is wholly frivolous and is
dismissed with costs of Rs.25,000/- and which costs shall be a condition
precedent to the petitioner contesting the case below. After all, if a wife has
enough money to engage lawyers for filing of frivolous petitions under
Article 227, then there is no reason why if the respondent has to incur costs
to defend such proceedings, costs should not be imposed.
JULY 16, 2014 VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.
Ne
