Asha Rastogi vs Kishan Rastogi
2021 Latest Caselaw 2525 MP

                          1
          THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                     CRR-770-2021
                     (ASHA RASTOGI Vs KISHAN RASTOGI)


                    Through video conferencing

Gwalior, dated: 18.06.2021

      Shri Ravi Ballabh Tripathi, Counsel for the applicant.

      It is submitted by counsel for the applicant that due to limited

functioning of Courts, he could not obtain certified copy of the

impugned order and accordingly today he has filed an application

seeking exemption from filing certified copy of the impugned order.

      Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

      From the record, it appears that the applicant has filed

photocopy of certified copy granted to the applicant.

      At this stage, it is submitted by counsel for applicant earlier

applicant has filed First Appeal against the impugned order and in the

said appeal, certified copy was filed. Since the First Appeal was not

maintainable, therefore it was withdrawn. However, the applicant

could not make a prayer for return of certified copy. Accordingly, it is

prayed that he may be exempted from filing certified copy.

      It is the case of applicant that earlier she had filed First Appeal

No.255/2021 which was dismissed as withdrawn. According to the

applicant certified copy of impugned order was filed in the said

appeal.

      Under these circumstances, the prayer for exemption from
                                              2
                             THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                        CRR-770-2021
                                         (ASHA RASTOGI Vs KISHAN RASTOGI)


                    filing certified copy is allowed. The applicant is exempted from filing

                    certified copy of the impugned order.

                          Heard on merits.

                          It is submitted by counsel for applicant that Family Court has

                    awarded maintenance amount from the date of award whereas in light

                    of judgment passed by this Court in Rajnesh v. Neha, (2021) 2 SCC

                    324 , it has been held that the maintenance amount should be

                    awarded from the date of application.

                          Call for the record of the Court below.

                          Issue notice to the respondent on payment of process fee by

registered as well as ordinary mode. Process fee be paid within three

working days.

List immediately after service of notice.

(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge Aman Aman Tiwari 2021.06.21 11:15:13 +05'30'