Gujarat High Court
Miss Shilpa Bansilal Shah vs Bansilal K. Shah on 8 September, 1992
Equivalent citations: (1993)1GLR223
JUDGMENT K.J. Vaidya, J.
1. "Whether a Court granting an ad interim or final award of maintenance to the discarded, disabled dependents, should rest itself, contended, thus far only and not further, merely stopping at the passing -of the said award, and thereafter necessarily wait for sometime to help them out to realize the amount so awarded till only, if, as and when they so approach it once again, following the second bout of the legal duel by way of execution of the impugned award either by taking-up further proceedings by way of executive and/or the Contempt proceedings ? Or "Whether alternatively, following the call of humanistic approach and the speedy justice as promised under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the concerned Court should immediately volunteer and take upon itself the sacred duty to render easy and expeditious substantial justice by seeing that the amount awarded is immediately made available to the claimants in a manner which may not only ultimately save them from further undue harassment of roaming about from pillar to the post, but before they ultimately getting exhausted and exasperated, start thinking and cursing that the remedy sought for was worst than their ailments and: start entertaining second thought of ever approaching the Court in future for begging the Justice?"
1.1 Aforesaid two staggering questions stare at us right in our eyes, demanding immediate answers in the overall interest of Justice to the needy claimants crying out their hearts for survival. Despite the maintenance award passed in favour by no less an agency than the Court itself, not to comply with the same is indeed something extremely serious and one of the most vexed social problem which plagues most of the maintenance claimants. Each one of us, nowadays witness this tragedy of the claimants and yet passively as if watch the same relegating the sufferers to the mercy of mechanical legal procedures, as if there is no immediate reasonable way-out ! This Court accordingly appreciating the human tragedy involved and heart-burns for such ill-fated claimants and also taking the responsibility of reflecting the overall social conscience and the concern of which this Court claims to be the beholder, would like to find out, discuss and direct certain ways and means which may ultimately provide immediate helping hand of the Court extended to such claimants before their faith in the "law" and "the administration of justice" is put to test if not lost!!
2. In order to appreciate, understand and ultimately answer the questions raised above, it is first of all necessary to have a look at the few relevant facts leading to this Contempt proceedings.
2.1 Few relevant facts - Petitioner Miss Shilpa Shah happens to be the daughter of the respondent-Shri Bansilal K. Shah, who is Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax at Ahmedabad! As the misfortune would have been the married and family life of the parties of this proceedings have gone on rock and appears to have been ruined, without any prospects of reunion in the near future, save and except by some unexpected happy "U" turn of events taking place in their lives, reconciling the situation. The respondent-Bansilal married Scat. Champaben, mother of the present petitioner many years back and have in all five children out of their lawful wedlock, that is, four daughters and one son, out of which, two daughters came to be married after the separation. As the misfortune would have been, Smt. Champaben and her minor children allegedly came to be deserted by the respondent and under the circumstances, they were constrained to initiate the maintenance proceedings under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, the same being Misc. Criminal Application No. 31 of 1984, before the learned Magistrate, wherein the respondent was directed to pay an amount of Rs. 400/- to Smt. Champaben and Rs. 100/- each to the two children every month. In course of time, on petitioner attending her majority on 25-9-1987, by virtue of an order dated 25-6-1988 passed in M.C.A. No. 26 of 1988, the maintenance granted to her earlier came to be discontinued. It is the case of the petitioner that she is aged 19 and has completed her graduation with the help and assistance from 'Shri Khadayata Kelvani Mandal', Ahmedabad, from where she has taken loan for her further studies and which she has to repay.
Under severe financial compulsion to maintain herself on the one hand and to meet with expenses for her further studies on the other hand, she filed Civil Suit, the same being Suit No. 4172 of 1989 under Section 20(3) of the Hindu Adoptions & Maintenance Act, 1956, in the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad against the respondent inter alia praying for the recovery of the outstanding amount of maintenance to the tune of Rs. 7,450/- for, 10 months and Rs. 745/- per month. It has been specifically averred in the said plaint that to her best of information and knowledge, the monthly salary of respondent by now has increased from Rs. 4,500/~ to 5,500/- and that the same may as well be verified by calling upon the respondent to produce the latest Monthly Salary Certificate. It further appears that during the pendency of the said suit proceedings, petitioner filed an interim application dated 23-1-1990 at Exh. 10 which came to be allowed by the Court passing an order dated 7-8-1990, which reads as under:
The application is partly allowed. The defendant is directed to pay to the plaintiff sum of Rs. 500/- per month towards her interim maintenance from the date of application till the disposal of the suit. He shall deposit the amount of arrears from the date of application till the date of the order within 30 days from the date of this order.
Thus, despite the above ad interim award in her favour, since the respondent did not care to comply with the same, for quite long time, petitioner has been constrained to move this Court by way of filing the present Misc. Civil Application to initiate the contempt proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 inter alia praying to call upon the respondent to purge the contempt at once by complying with the impugned ad interim award, paying up the entire outstanding amount to her, etc. It is further averred in the present application that the respondent has not challenged the impugned ad interim award by way of an appeal or revision before this Court or any other Court, this appears to be till filing of the contempt application.
3. It appears that the respondent who was duly served with the rule issued by this Court as far back as on 13-2-1991 had initially engaged Mr. F. A. Memon, learned Advocate to defend him, who for whatever reasons thereafter has not appeared before this Court. It further appears that on 9-7-1992 respondent had requested this Court (Coram : Hon'ble M/s. K. 0. Shah & M. S. Parikh, JJ.) to grant him some time to engage another Advocate to defend his case, which appears to have been granted by an order dated 23-7-1992 with the specific understanding and direction that the matter will proceed further on that date. When the matter was called out on 23-7-1992, the respondent was absent and had sent an application praying for time accompanied by a medical certificate stating therein that he was suffering from influenza. The Court with great reluctance, adjourned the matter to 30-7-1992. On 30-7-1992, despite the above order since the' respondent did not remain present before the Court, we were constrained to direct office to issue a bailable warrant in sum of Rs. 5.000/- (rupees five thousand) only and the surety of like amount, making It returnable on 10-8-1992, when the respondent appeared before us, we taking into" consideration his gross recalcitrant attitude in not complying with the ad interim maintenance award, in the first instance directed him to deposit sum of Rs. 5,000/- (rupees five thousand only) before 2-00 p.m. on 11-8-1992. He was also directed to engage Advocate, in the meantime, if he wanted to. Thereafter, hearing of the matter was accordingly stand over to 12-8-1992. On 12-8-1992, respondent submitted that out of Rs. 5,000/- directed to be paid to the petitioner, he has been able to manage only Rs. 1,200/- (rupees twelve hundred) only which have been duly paid up to the petitioner by him requesting us to grant further time upto 17-8-1992, in order to deposit the balance amount of Rs. 3,800/-. The same was granted. On 17-8-1992 when the matter was called out, respondent submitted that lie has deposited Rs. 3,800/- before the Court on 14-8-1992 in all depositing Rs. 5,000/. On this statement being made by the respondent, we permitted the petitioner to withdraw the same. Now, despite the specific order to deposit the said amount in this Court, which was passed in his presence only, respondent surprisingly deposited the same in City Civil Court, obviously it can be inferred with a view to harass the petitioner. Anyway, as regards the balance amount of Rs. 10,000/ -(rupees ten thousand only) the respondent gave an undertaking before us that he will deposit the same on or before 1-9-1992. On 2-9-1992, we were told that the entire amount has been deposited and petitioner had withdrawn the same. Today we are further told that the respondent has also deposited Rs. 1,000/- in this Court, being arrears of ad interim maintenance for the months ending July and August, which in turn are withdrawn ; by the petitioner.
3.1 This is how only after the contempt notice came to be issued by this Court against the respondent, that scared of punishment he became wiser enough to, discharge his duties by paying up the entire outstanding arrears of Rs. 15,000/- by way of an ad interim maintenance towards none-else but his own flesh and blood, viz., daughter. It is really unfortunate that such highly educated, cultured family should be suffering because of the attitude of respondent-father.
The fact remains that the helpless petitioner and her minor sister and brother are just struggling hard for their bare existence, carrying on the battle to breath only with and in the hope of some saucer by way of drip by drip maintenance provided to them by respondent-husband.
4. In these extremely hard days of economic crisis, day-to-day insecurity and continuous rising prices, we just shudder to think what terrible fear must be gripping this frustrated, ill-fated petitioner which indeed for that purpose can drive any young girl in any dark comer !Are we to believe that the respondent, who is a father and responsible high-officer is unable to think of this ? And yet believe us that to believe it is to see it in the instant case. What we have witnessed in the instant case is not a sordid story merely limited to the fate of petitioner alone, as this sort of tragedy is practically dogging hundreds and thousands, in fact, practically all the claimants of maintenance in the land of ours where despite they being awarded maintenance by the Court, either under the Cri. Pro. Code or some other relevant statutes, do not get the same and are found to be in not better position than where they were just before the maintenance proceedings came to be initiated. The very fact that the, petitioner and such other similarly placed discarded, disabled dependent has to approach for 'begging the maintenance' that by itself is the ,fact indicative enough to what an utterly intolerable, desparate and helpless situation it must have been created for the said needy sections that they are constrained to knock doors of the Court to eke out some amount for maintaining their breathing existence, against their own family member-father or husband; as the case may be ! ! Such helpless persons, first of all with very great reluctance, muster some courage and thereafter with still greater personal difficulties, approach the Court praying for maintenance. Here also, after filing maintenance application before the Court, their miseries do not come to an end immediately. Rather the same lingers on and on, painfully persisting and pastering them further testing the qualities of their patience and perseverance as the path of the 'speedy, justice' these days is not as easy and free as the same is beset with two major stumbling-blocks in its way, namely; (i) easy on asking and free-of. -cost 'adjournments' and (ii) some sudden 'strike calls' by the learned Advocates deciding to refrain from attending the Court work. Incidentally enough, when the issue of delay in justice perpetrating miseries of the dependent claimants is under discussion, it would be indeed quite relevant to also reflect upon the said two major factors contributing to protracting the proceedings in the Court. Accordingly, indiscreet adjournments and irresponsible strike calls, over and above other reasons very much come in the way of the litigating public more particularly of two classes, namely the needy weaker sections of the society who are hand-to-mouth and, some falsely implicated innocent undertrial prisoners languishing in the Jail, These two aliments/problems of the Court proceedings are indeed terrible and upsetting enough to any human being worth the name, any lover of the justice, any man with little common sense and heart for disabled, poor and innocent persons and therefore believe us, save and except the learned Advocates who else in fact can help them out of the trap of, misfortune and injustice in which they have fallen ! ! Under the circumstance, question of the day is-are not the concerned Court and the learned Advocates, before granting easy and indiscreet adjournments on mere asking and/or while going on strike, expected to be alive to this burning social problem/tragedy for which essentially the entire institution consisting of the, administration of justice on the one hand and the legal profession on the other hand exists and indeed because of which only the salaries, livelihood and luxuries of the Judges and learned Advocates are maintained? It is under such circumstances that they should feel obliged and further express their gratitude to the litigating world by performing their first and foremost legal duty of not to delay the justice any more. We feel that indiscreet granting of adjournments and call for strike, particularly in such type of cases unnecessarily further prolong the sufferings of some innocent undertrial accused and weaker sections of the society, who are (in given case) hand-to-mouth. It seems to us that the Court and the learned Advocates by granting adjournments and/or giving unjust strike calls, sometimes unwittingly play in the hands of those anti-socials who are only interested in schemingly delaying the Court proceedings to frustrate and tire-out the deserving claimants in their quest for justice. When these facts stand clearly highlighted, this Court indeed have all the faith and confidence that henceforth all the concerned subordinate Courts and the learned Advocates would not resort to any indiscreet adjournments and/or strike calls which may unnecessarily further precipitate and perpetrate the injustice to the victims of injustice particularly, the weaker sections of the society whose first and foremost saviour is the legal profession and its enlightened and public spirited members of the Bar. Accordingly, we hope and believe that this appeal of ours will surely help in bringing about the end to an era of unjustifiable adjournments and indiscreet strike calls. Further, as it appears to us, we must frankly express that any unjustifiable and indiscreet adjournments and/or strike calls are undoubtedly the very antithesis and affront on the provisions of speedy justice provided under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The grievance of learned Advocate in a given case, sometimes are and may be cuite genuine, just and legitimate, but at the same time, looking to the great expectations of the society in them, their grievances should not come in the way of people clammouring for justice and the Court delivering speedy justice. The members of Bar are playing and indeed further still have to play their pivotal and decisive role in preserving and protecting the 'Rule of Law' and 'the administration of justice'. Accordingly, they need not get immediately exasperated over some issue and act in a manner giving strike call, which may in turn turn-down the great expectation of the society in them- We further feel that the duly and importance of members of the Bar to the society can never be under-estimated and by no means or manner, less than that of a valiant soldier defending the frontiers of the country and/ or that of an active employee of the 'Fire Brigade' which rushes out to fight with fire on a mere call. It was indeed this Bar of the country only which rising to the occasion, has played decisive role in the pre-independence struggle helping in bringing about the independence to this country. To name some of these illustrious members of the Bar from galaxy of stars, they are : Mahatma Gandhi, father of the Nation, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar; Shri Bhulabhai Desai, Shri Kanaiyaial Munshi, Dr. Rajendra-prasad, V.R. Vankatraman and many other such illustrious sons of the Nation. It is not possible to imagine any iethargy or strike in the services, either of a soldier and/or employee of Fire Brigade, as (he consequences of the same are not difficult to imagine. In a way, perhaps, the members of the Bar are on quite higher pedestal than that of oven a soldier or employee of Fire Brigade because compartitivily the war and/or fire are not matter of recurring incidence as they tike place occasionally. As against that, sufferings of people to the hands of law-breakers is a matter of daily occurrence, and therefore, members of the Bar like a Doctor or police personnel cannot relex or delay for a while even in responding to the social call for discharging their duties. This glorious heritage of pre-independence members of the Bar, we cannot afford to forget so easily as the duties and responsibilities of members of the Bar have many folds further increased after the emergence of independence. The future of 'democracy' and the 'Rule of Law' in our country is safe only and only if, and as long as there is an up-right fearless bar eschewing indiscreet adjournments and strike rails, ready to respond to the call of the society for justice alongwith independent, fearless judiciary. We hope, trust and request that bearing in mind the above discussion, the indiscreet adjournments and strike calls would come to an end for the sake of overall social interest and in the interest of justice. ' 4.1. Further even after aforesaid protracted tiresome proceedings before the Court and even thereafter obtaining some favourable ad interim or final award, as the case may be from the Court, by way of some maintenance, the discarded dependent have to unfortunately still wage further battle, that is to say, struggle further for the recovery of said award by taking up further execution proceedings. It is indeed not difficult to imagine the pathetic condition of such claimants. What indeed is the meaning of word 'Interim Award' of the Court, if the same has to remain merely a paper order? What is even the meaning of such 'Justice* which even after awarding the maintenance amount remains only a 'lip service' ? Can a mere award of maintenance on paper feed the hungary bellies and cloth the nacked claimants ? Mere award of maintenance on paper does not maintain the claimants. It is the amount realized pursuant' to the said order which maintain the body and soul of the claimants together. Under the circumstances, if the discarded dependents who are hand-to-mouth have to go for a second about of legal duel to realize the money awarded to them - it is indeed fun for the opponents, tragedy for the claimants and Joke on justice. It is indeed quite unjust and sometimes cruel too, to expect or to direct such claimants to once again have a second long drawn inning against the opponent-husband or father, as the case may be, as it sometimes exposes the weakness of Law and the system in delivering immediate justice. We feel that the relevant provisions of maintenance, be it under Section 20(3) of the Hindu Adoption & Maintenance Act. 1956 or under Section 125 of the Cri. Pro. Code, 1973 or under any such other statutes, as the case may be, have of course' given quite a beneficial directions to award maintenance to the discarded dependents. However, taking into consideration the stock of situation like the one in the instant cases', it appears that mere insertion of some beneficial provisions of Law in a Statute by itself will not and cannot serve any desired purpose unless the Court administering the same also commit itself to the cause underlying the provision and gird-up its loins to activate and implement the same by using its better wit, wisdom and discretion in a manner which may deliver the speedy and substantial' justice to the needy weaker sections of the society before it drops dead or unconscious at the very door-step? of the Court hoping and dreaming that some day 'justice' would be done ? ! Here, the judicial activisni must exhibit the edge of eagerness to help needy sections much more farther by immediately putting money in their hands than the eagerness of claimants even to get it! No doubt, under the Civil Pro. Code and Cri. Pro. Code, there is some procedure laid down in matter of how to enforce the maintenance award. But it may be stated that the said procedure is so protracted, tardy, cumbersome and agonizing that practically to ask such weak claimants to have a second round for realizing the amount awarded is as if asking a man walking with the aid of crutches to scale the high mountain peak ! Further, not only that but since the maintenance amount will become due every month, it is practically every month that the claimants would be required to approach the Court for execution of the same ! This is as if maintenance award is a sort of hurdle race, wherein only after claimants crosses hurdles after hurdles that they are legally entitled to be prized with the award ! ! We think there cannot be any greater joke on such discarded disabled dependents than to expect them to undergo such an ordeal journey of roaming about from one Court to another Court, from one proceedings to another proceedings endlessly ! Of course, the husband, father or the son, as the case may be, who have committed a social crime in deserting his wife, children or parents and have refused to maintain them, instead of he being punished for the respective wrongs, is as if left to enjoy this protracted proceedings wherein the claimants are made to chase and chase, till they get exhausted and/or Court comes to their rescue by prevailing over the opponents to pay-up the amount of maintenance award.
5. Further, the first round of maintenance proceedings as discussed above, ordinarily takes at least one or two years for the Court to decide the case of awarding maintenance, and the second round thereafter of commencing recovery proceedings is equally quite long-drawn, tiring and frustrating one, taking about 2 to 3 years ! For example, turning to the facts of the instant case, in order to enforce and execute the aforesaid ad interim award of maintenance, petitioner is required to follow the procedure as laid down in Order 21 of C. P. C, 1908 which pertains to "the Execution of Decrees & Orders". Accordingly, under the scheme of said Order, the execution of maintenance award essentially being the execution of money decree, the execution can be sought either against the person concerned or his property [vide Rule 11(2)(j)(i), (ii) or (iii)], If the execution is sought within a year and the same is sought against the property of judgment-debtor, than the procedure that is to be followed would be vide proviso to Rule 22 (ii), where the Court straightway order for' jangam warrant. In case of the execution against a person (vide Rules 37 to 40), the Court instead of arresting the person concerned straightway issue a notice calling upon him to appear and show-cause why he should not be committed to the Civil Prison in execution of decree passed against him/her. Thereafter, in case where jangam warrant is issued, judgment-debtor can appear and file objections or he may prompt up someone falsely making a claim over the properties which are attached {vide Rules 41 to 40, and Rule 58). The properties which are attached ultimately if held to be of the judgment-debtor, are required to he sold (vide Rules 64 to 96) by auction, and the proceeds thereof will be appropriated to the decreetal amount, i. e., judgment-debt or by committing person concerned to the Civil Prison. In case if any person fails to satisfy the decree and the Court is constrained to commit him to the Civil Prison, he is required to be sent to the Civil Prison, for which necessary diet money is required to he paid (vide Rule 39). No doubt, by committing a person to the Civil Prison, he is not relieved by paying the judgment-debt. Now, the aforesaid discussion clearly shows that the procedure to be undergone for execution of the ad interim maintenance is quite tiring, frustrating and exhaustive. Every month the amount of maintenance becomes due and it becomes judgment-debt. Now, if; the judgment-debtor intends to harass the judgment-creditor, more particularly of a maintenance decree, as has been done in the instant case, by adopting recalcitrant attitude then moment every month the amount of maintenance becomes due, the judgment-creditor will be required to file execution application. Similarly, the maintenance proceedings under Section 125 of the Cri. Pro. Code and in the event of opponent not complying with maintenance order, the process of realizing the amount is equally long and tiresome. Further, even after execution proceedings, the matter does not come to an end as despite the said proceedings terminating in favour of the claimant, there are cases and cases wherein the judgment-debtor hardly of its own complies with the money decree and the claimant ultimately has to initiate proceedings either under Order XXXII, Rule 2-A or the Contempt proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 before appropriate Court, as has been done in the present case.
6. Now no doubt, ordinarily, as seen above, if the money decree is not satisfied by the judgment-debtor of his own, the same would be required to be enforced by executing the same initiating separate execution proceeding under Order XXI of the Civil Pro. Code and the relevant rules made thereunder. Now, while talking of the law, procedure to be followed, etc., the Court cannot afford to be oblivious to the most important aspect of the case, namely, that what was sought to be executed was not an ordinary 'Money Decree' but it was the 'Maintenance Award'. This maintenance award though in a way is a money decree, the same deserves to be viewed from slightly different angle as it vitally affects the question of day-to-day maintenance of the needy neglected members of the family. An award of maintenance is just that small sum of amount which maintains a person from day-to-day by keeping his soul and body together and some clothes to put on. Under the circumstances, any delay in getting the maintenance amount would vitally disturb the very existence of the concerned claimant, depending upon the said maintenance amount. Under such circumstances, any delay in not placing the maintenance amount in the hands of the needy claimants would frustrate and militate against the very object for which the maintenance provisions came to be incorporated under the relevant Acts, Further, as discussed above, the execution procedure as provided under Order XXI of C. P. C. and rules made thereunder is indeed so cumbersome and frustrating task for the weaker struggling for life sections of the society that the same has set us thinking, constraining us to explore some other possible avenues, if possible, in order to find out as to how comparatively, in quite expeditious and easy way, the amount awarded to the claimants is realized and placed in their hands, instead of compelling them to go hard way round and round through further legal battles. Under such circumstances, true to the spirit of Article 21 of the Constitution of India to deliver speedy justice, it appears to us that whenever any maintenance application is filed before the Court by any discarded disabled dependents (be it under Section 20(3) of the Hindu Adoptions & Maintenance Act, 1956 or under Section 125 of the Cri. Pro. Code or any other such maintenance application under any law) then in that case, in order to see that they are not made to suffer any further more, unnecessarily, the Court entertaining such application is advised, as a duty, to follow the following guidelines, viz.,
(i) To first of all find but as to whether the opponent from whom the maintenance is claimed is serving, that is to say, whether he is an employee either of the State or the Central Government or Public/Private Corporation, or any private Institution or of any individual, as the case may be, by collecting the relevant material in the said regard from the petitioner. On getting the same, it should thereafter make the Head of the said Department a necessary-party to the proceedings by issuing a notice in the said regard.
(ii) Thereafter, to call upon the opponent to produce on record the latest salary and allowance certificate, date of his retirement, etc.
(iii) To further call upon the opponent to file an affidavit stating therein what are his other moveable and/or immoveable properties in his name and possession alongwith the latest savings bank account passbook, shares, securities and other relevant documents pertaining to any investment anywhere.
(iv) At the end of the ad interim or final proceeding, after determining the maintenance amount, the Court shall further direct the said head-of-the-department first to deduct the said amount from the salary of opponent and give the same to the petitioner and only thereafter to release the pay-packet to the respondent.
(v) That while doing above, the Court shall also expressly impress upon the department concern that in the event of non-compliance with the direction of the Court, he shall be liable for the Contempt of Court.
(vi) That further, in case the opponent does not fall in any of the categories streamlined above, than in that case, it will equally be - duty of the Court to see that the maintenance proceedings before it are given top most priority to decide and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible, avoiding unjust and indiscreet adjournments even by awarding ad interim relief, cost or exemplary cost, as the facts and circumstances of the given case warrants, taking special care that harassment and agonize of the claimants are as far as possible minimised, if cannot be totally eliminated.
7. The aforesaid guidelines are required to be given, bearing in mind the pathetic plight of the discarded, disabled dependents who without the activism and assistance of the Court are not able to self-help and carry the struggle for existence. This, much needed dynamism and judicial activism is the only way to ensure speedy justice as warranted under Article 21 of the Constitution of India which is the guiding spirit and source of inspiration to any Court. The net result of this would be that not only the needy weaker sections of the society will get their survival dose of maintenance immediately and on every month in time but it may as well save the collosal wastage of precious public time because of the multiplicity of the proceedings and save weaker sections from roaming about from pillar to the post with begging bowl in their hands, begging for the maintenance !!
8. Now, turning back to the facts of the instant case, the maintenance proceedings at this juncture are pending in City Civil Court at Ahmedabad since 1989, and therefore, with a view to see that petitioner is not made to chase the respondent and go to the Court every month, begging for maintenance amount, we in the light of directions given above would like to direct the Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad or whosoever other responsible officer under him is in-charge of disbursement of salary, firstly to directly deduct the amount of Rs. 500/- every month from the salary of the respondent and, either pay the same to petitioner or deposit the same in City Civil Court, and thereafter, pay the balance amount to the respondent. At this juncture, we are told that the respondent is to retire from services w.e.f. first January, 1993. In that case, we hereby further direct the concerned authorities disbursing the pension amount to first deduct amount of Rs. 500/- every month towards satisfaction of the maintenance amount and either pay the same to the petitioner directly or deposit the same in the City Civil Court, and thereafter, to pay the balance of the said amount to the respondent. This direction of ours shall have to be carried out till further orders by this Court, by all concerned, and we make it absolutely clear that not to comply with these directions, under any pretext, will amount to the Contempt of this Court. Secondly, we further direct the Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad that as and when the respondent retires from his services, he shall forward a copy of this judgment underlining the directions, alongwith pension papers to the Pension Disbursing Authorities Thirdly, the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad is directed to decide and dispose of the pending Civil Suit between the parties as expeditiously as possible, preferably within six months from the date of receipt of this order. Fourthly, over and above, the present proceedings, all the concerned Courts with which the maintenance proceedings are pending, are directed to give TOP MOST PRIORITY to decide and dispose them of as expeditiously as possible, by avoiding unjust and indiscreet adjournments, even by awarding ad interim relief, cost or exemplary cost, depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case.
9. That takes us to the next important question as to whether the respondent has committed the Contempt of Court by not complying with the impugned ad interim award of maintenance passed by the City Civil Court and if yes, what should be the nature of sentence which can adequately meet with the ends of justice Mr. S.J. Joshi, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner highlighting certain circumstances appearing on record submitted that despite the fact that respondent is the father, a highly: placed and highly salaried officer, he not only has deliberately not discharged his duty towards petitioner, who is of the marriageable age, but in the process, he has flouted the ad interim award passed by the Court; in favour of the petitioner. Mr. Joshi further submitted that though the ad. interim award in question came to be passed as long back as on 7-8-1990, and yet for these long two years, the same not been deliberately complied with. It was neither the case of respondent that he was not getting his salary during the relevant time, nor that he was not knowing about the impugned ad interim award of maintenance passed against him. Mr. Joshi further submitted that it was only issuance of the contempt notice, and further only when this Court appreciating the misery of struggling of the petitioner, directed the respondent to deposit some amount that he gradually started depositing the said arrears - till then, not a single paise was paid to the petitioner. Mr. Joshi further submitted that taking into consideration the history of the respondent, if a lenient view is taken in this matter, he may once again play dialatory tactics with the ad interim award or when final award is passed, by delaying payment of monthly maintenance. Mr. Joshi further submitted that the present petition for contempt came to be filed as far back as in the month of February, 1991 and it is only after about 8 months that for the first time, petitioner has been able to see the colour of currency notes. This highly reprehensible stone-heart conduct of the petitioner who is on such a high post and is capable of paying the interim award, is so outrageous, contemptuous and contumanious that to take a lenient view, of the matter, would be not only putting premium over unjust and illegal attitude of the petitioner but the same indirectly may even encourage other similarly placed persons in the society to fearlessly flour( the orders of the Court in future. At this juncture, respondent submitted that he be given some time to engage Advocate. As stated above, this question does not arise as the matter is pending since long, if he sincerely wanted to engage any Advocate, it would not have taken time. Under the circumstances, it is not possible for us to acceed to this request of the respondent. Respondent further submitted that he has to maintain his old ailing mother aged 81 years, who is residing with him and in that view of the matter, to pay Rs. 500/- per month would be quite harsh. Respondent further submitted that the entire trouble started because of the rude and harsh nature and misbehaviour of his wife, who has deserted him and that he has never deserted her. Now, in this proceeding, we cannot enter into the question whether the amount is excessive or harsh, or as to whether the wife of the respondent was the root-cause of this trouble, as we are sitting in the contempt proceedings only. In this contempt proceeding, what we are, required to see is whether ad interim award in question passed by the subordinate Court is complied with or not, and if not, whether wilfully, not complied with. Thereafter, once we reach the conclusion that the same has been wilfully and flagrantly violated, without any justifiable grounds, the respondent is got to be held guilty for the contempt and is required to be punished for the same. Therefore, this Court cannot enter into the question of merits of the order passed. The circumstances highlighted above not only merely raise finger of accusation of the contempt of the Court against the respondent but in our opinion, the charge of the wilful disobedience of ad interim award passed by the Court is dearly brought home against him beyond any manner and the shadow of doubt against him.
10. In this view of the matter, the consequential order that must follow is what should be the kind and nature of the sentence. There is no doubt whatsoever in our mind that the contempt committed by respondent is one of the grossest nature. Not merely because he has not complied with the ad interim award passed by City Civil Court but what in our opinion aggravated the situation is the fact that the respondent is a father and accordingly was required to show come grace to the petitioner, but he was also quite capable of complying with and paying ad interim maintenance award, he did not paid a single paise till the contempt notice came to be issued. In our opinion, assuming even that the petitioner according to opponent was at fault, then even if the father will not have that generous heart and pardon his daughter, who else; in this world will? The mother and father are considered to be" the; living Gods on earth and accordingly they are supposed to give nothing but the Love, Affection and Protection and whatever best they can otherwise shower also on their children. We may also -mention that at one stage of the proceedings, before us, the respondent had gifted nice garments to the petitioner and a Sari for his wife. We hoped that reunion could be brought about to put an end to this matter. But somehow that did not happen. Ordinarily, we would have readily agreed with Mr. Joshi in taking a very strict view of the matter by making the respondent to see prison-bars, but at the same time, we do not want to create a situation which may create psychological complex in the mind of respondent, which in turn ultimately may come in the way of future reconciliation between the parties. If this Court sends respondent to Jail which is not difficult at all, it will be practically a point of no return and the respondent may decide here and now in this Court only, that cotne what may he is not going to be re-united with his family. Thus, it is only with a view to keep the doors of family meeting and greeting each other wide open and to see that they once again enjoy their life, taking whatever happened in the past as a bad dream, that we do not propose to send respondent to Jail and instead take a comparatively lenient and lighter view of the matter by inflicting fine of Rs. 1,500/- only.
11. In the result, this contempt petition is allowed. Respondent accordingly is directed to pay the fine of Rs. 1,500/- (Rupees one thousand five hundred) only on or before 9-10-1992, in default, to undergo S.I. for one week. At this stage, Mr. Joshi, learned Counsel for the petitioner requested this Court to award some costs to the petitioner. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, we further direct that out of the fine amount of Rs. 1,500/- to be paid by the respondent, when so realised, Rs. 1,000/- by way of cost be given to the petitioner. Rule made absolute.