Judgment:
P.N. Nag, J.
(1) In the petition under Sections 22 and 23 of the Indian Divorce Act. (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the petitioner (wife)has prayed for judicial separation and also for grant of permanent alimony under Section 37 of the Act, to the extent of Rs. 60 lakhs, which would be about half of the respondent's income.
(2) Along with the petition under Sections 22 and 23 of the Act, the petitioner has also filed the present application, being is 12407/92, under Sections 27 and 28 of the Act, seeking restraint order against the respondent(husband) from selling, renting out or alienating in manner the propertyNo. X-37, Green Park, New Delhi 110016.
(3) On 1-10-1992, when the matrimonial reference and is 12407/92came up for preliminary hearing, this Court passed the following order on this Ai 12407/92.
'IN the meanwhile, the respondent is restrained from alienating or transferring in any manner property bearing No. X-37, GreenPark, New Delhi. The respondent will also not interfere in the use and occupation of the said property by the petitioner.'
Reply to the application, is 12407/92, has been filed. Counsel for the applicant-petitioner states that the rejoinder to the reply has also been filed.However, the same is not on record. Counsel for the applicant-petitioner will check up with registry and have the same placed on record.I have heard the learned Counsel for both the parties at length.
(4) There is no averment at all in the application or the rejoinder that the petitioner was residing in X-37, Green Park, New Delhi on 1-10-1992when the interim order was passed by Arun Kumar, J. It appears from the reply that the petitioner has shifted to House No. 33, Line 18 Block C, Enclave, Phase I, Gurgaon and on 1-10-1992 she was not in use and occupation of the said property. thereforee, no interim order can be passed against the respondent insofar as this particular aspect is concerned.
(5) The petitioner has asked for permanent alimony under Section 37of the Act and in case she succeeds in getting the order of judicial separation under Sections 22 and 23 of the Act, in her favor and against the respondent the petitioner will be entitled to the grant of permanent alimony.Therefore, there should be left some security in the form of immovable properties or otherwise which should be sufficient and adequate enough for the grant of permanent alimony under Section 37 of the Act and that afore-mentioned house in Green Park can be adequate security for the petitioner in case it is granted by the Court.
(6) Dr. B. Singh, learned Counsel for the respondent submits that Sections 27 & 28 of the Act under which interim order has been sought for,are not applicable in the present facts and circumstances of the case and,therefore, no interim order can be passed by this Court.
(7) It is not necessary to decide this question. It is settled principle of law that every Court has inherent power to grant relief during the pendency of the proceedings if the interest of justice so requires. thereforee, this contention of the learned Counsel for the respondent fails.
(8) At this stage, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the respondent is prepared to give an undertaking to the Court to the effect that be will not alienate the aforesaid property. Let the statement of the respondent who is present in Court today, be recorded.Statement of Col. Basant Lal (Retd.), son of late Shri Moti Lal,aged 73 years, resident of X-37, Green Park, New Delhi 110016 on solemn affirmation.It undertake to the Court that I will not transfer or alienate in any manner the property No. X-37, Green Park, New Delhi 110016.
(9) In view of the undertaking given to (his Court by the respondent today that he will not transfer or alienate in any manner the propertyNo. X-37, Green Park. New Delhi-110016 and what it discussed above, in my opinion there is no necessity for passing any order on this application which stands disposed of. Interim order passed on 1-10-1992 shall also standvacated.