RA-CR-1-2025 (O&M) IN 102 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT Milan Gulati Bhavana Gulati and another CORAM: HON HON Present:- Mr. for the Mr. Jagmohan S. Ghuman, Advocate for the respondents. SUDHIR SINGH Present review application has been filed seeking review of the order dated 09.12.2024 2. Learned counsel for the review the divorce petition under Section 13 of the ‘the Act of 1955’) 24 of the Act of 1955 directed the review Rs.40,000/- per month petition. He further directed to be paid instead of from the date of filing of submits that the said aspect (O&M) IN FAO-M-31-2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT RA-CR-1-2025 (O&M) IN FAO-M-31 Date of Decision: versus Bhavana Gulati and another HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH Mr. Vishal Aggarwal, Advocate for the review applicant-appellant. Mr. Jagmohan S. Ghuman, Advocate for the respondents. ***** SUDHIR SINGH, J. Present review application has been filed seeking review of the order dated 09.12.2024 passed in the main appeal. Learned counsel for the review-applicant/appellant the divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act of 1955’), the respondent/wife had preferred of 1955. Learned Family Court, vide its order dated review-applicant/appellant to pay the per month to respondent No.1/wife further submits that as per law, the maintenance ought to have been paid from the date of filing of application under Section 24 from the date of filing of the main petition for divorce. submits that the said aspect was also left to be adjudicated 1 of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2025 (O&M) IN 31-2024 Date of Decision: February 28, 2025 .….Review applicant-appellant …. Respondents SUDHIR SINGH JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Mr. Jagmohan S. Ghuman, Advocate for the respondents. Present review application has been filed seeking review of the order applicant/appellant submits that in Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short , the respondent/wife had preferred an application under Section Learned Family Court, vide its order dated 25.10.2023, had applicant/appellant to pay the maintenance to the tune of /wife from the date of filing of the the maintenance ought to have been application under Section 24 ibid main petition for divorce. He further was also left to be adjudicated while passing the 2 appellant s Present review application has been filed seeking review of the order in Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short under Section had to the tune of filing of the the maintenance ought to have been ibid He further while passing the MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.03.04 17:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment RA-CR-1-2025 (O&M) IN FAO-M-31-2024 2 of 2 judgment under review, and hence, the review-applicant/appellant seeks review of the said judgment only to the said extent, as aforesaid. 3. On receipt of advance copy of the review application, learned counsel for the respondents appears and accepts notice, and raises no objection, in case, the aforesaid prayer of the review-applicant/appellant is allowed. He however, submits that the review-applicant/appellant is in arrears of maintenance and a liberty may be granted to the respondents to file an execution petition, in respect of the same. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file along with the judgment dated 09.12.2024 passed by this Court. 5. Concededly and as per law as well, the maintenance amount is required to be granted from the date of filing of an application under Section 24 of the Act instead of filing of the main petition for grant of divorce. 6. Considering the same, it is clarified that respondent No.1/wife shall be entitled to the maintenance amount from the date of filing of her application under Section 24 of the Act of 1955 before the learned Family Court. Needless to say, respondent No.1 will be at liberty to file an execution petition in respect of maintenance amount awarded by the learned Family Court. 7. Review application stands disposed of, accordingly. 8. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (SUDHIR SINGH) JUDGE (JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE February 28, 2025 mahavir Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.03.04 17:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment