IN THE COURT OF HON’BLE PRINCIPAL FAMILY JUDGE, (jurisdiction)

Case No. of Year

Application for review and recall of order dated______ whereby an amount of Rs. _______/-
was ordered to be paid to Mrs.____________ as legal expenses.
Hon’ble Sir,
It is most respectfully submitted that:-
1. The proceedings u/s 125 CrPC are quasi civil proceedings. These are not Criminal
proceedings. Being Civil Proceedings, the review is maintainable as also so held by
various Hon’ble High Courts in catena of cases.
2. The order is required to be reviewed if it suffers from error apparent on the face of
record. Hon’ble Supreme Court has also held that an order where there is apparent
error, whether of fact or law, on the face or record, is required to be reviewed.
3. There are apparent errors of not only of fact but also of law in the impugned order
dated ______, as brought out here-in-under:
4. The copy of the application of Smt. _________ seeking interim maintenance and legal
expenses was handed over to the applicant herein during the proceedings in the court
itself and the Hon’ble Court passed the order awarding legal expenses to her
immediately thereafter, without giving an opportunity to the applicant herein to file
objections. Such an order is required to be recalled as per laid down law of Hon’ble
Supreme Court.
5. Legal expenses here awarded to Mrs. _________ without even deciding the
admissibility of interim maintenance adopting an arbitrary & illegal procedure. If one
is not entitled for interim maintenance, legal expenses cannot be awarded. If one is
able to maintain herself, that person can as well meet the legal expenses.
6. Even if one is entitled to the interim maintenance, she cannot be awarded legal
expenses as per Hon’ble Supreme Court ruling for the reason that free legal aid is
available at (jurisdiction).
7. Every final order u/s 125 CrPC is required to contain point(s) for determination, the
decision there on and reasons for the decision as per Section 354(6) of CrPC. The
award of legal expenses is certainly a final order and having been delivered as it
stands, is apparently illegal.
8. It may also be submitted that she is not entitled for any relief whatsoever u/s 125
CrPC for the following reasons.
9. She does not fulfill the very objective of section 125 CrPC namely prevention of
destitution and vagrancy as she has been living with her parents after deserting her
matrimonial house, she has a share in ancestral property valued several crores of Rs.
and that she has filed the application u/s 125 CrPC after one year of desertion from
her matrimonial house.
10. She does not fulfill the essential ingredients of section 125 CrPC. Further, she is a
professionally qualified holding MBA degree. Such woman cannot be allowed to sit
idle waiting for a doll from their husband. This Hon’ble Court cannot allow creation
of professionally qualified idlers who block the progress of society. Any relief to such
woman shall be against the laid down law of several Hon’ble High Courts.
11. The relevant rulings of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and various Hon’ble High Courts,
which supports the submissions made here-in-above shall be filed, if required and so
ordered, by this Hon’ble Court.
12. In case, any of the submissions made in above paras does not find favour with the
Hon’ble Court, reasoned order be made, as is required under law.
Prayer
It is, respectfully prayed to review the order dated____ and dismiss the application of Smt.
___________ seeking interim maintenance and legal expenses. In the alternative, to recall the
said order and issue fresh order in accordance with the law after giving opportunity to the
applicant herein to file objections and after hearing him.
Applicant
Date:

1. That I say, that I am the defendant in the above suit and the
applicant in the application. I am well conversant with the facts and
circumstances of the case and stand competent to swear to this
affidavit.

2. That I say, that the aforementioned suit is for the recovery of an

amount of Rs ________, allegedly due to the respondent-plaintiff
from me, for selling Electronic Weighing Machine to the applicant.

That I say, that notice in the suit was not duly served on me.

4. The notice was in fact served to another person in my name in

the same locality without verifying address. The said person did not
care to inform me about any such service of notice and it was only
on enquiry that I came to know that the address was wrongly given
into the Process Memo of the summons by the respondent-plaintiff
and therefore the notice was returned unserved earlier. Therefore,
there was no due or proper service of notice on the applicant.

4. That I say, that it was only from one of my friends , who

happened to have a case before this Hon'ble Court last week, that I
came to know about the filing of the suit and the declaration of the
applicant ex parte by this Hon'ble Court, not having appeared before
this Hon'ble Court inspite of the alleged service of notice. This has
caused great inconvenience and hardship to me. I further came to
know that this Hon'ble Court had posted the case to for plaintiff's
evidence. If evidence is taken ex parte and the suit decreed by this
Hon'ble Court, it will cause irreparable loss, injury and hardship to
me.

5. That I say, that I have got very serious contentions in the suit
and have records to show that all amounts due to the respondent-
plaintiff towards the aforementioned construction have been fully
paid against proper receipts issued by him and there is no amount
due from, and payable by me.
6. That I say, that the case has not reached the trial stage. Even the
issues have not been framed. The respondent-plaintiff will not
therefore in any way be prejudicially affected by setting aside the ex
parte order.

7. It is therefore, just and necessary that this Hon'ble Court may be

pleased to set aside the order dated passed by declaring the
applicant ex parte and to allow me to contest the suit by filing the
written statement. It is also necessary that this Hon'ble Court may
be pleased not to go ahead with the trial of the suit on the namely
the next date of hearing.

It seems reasonable to think that the legislature intended that an order under s. 3 should be
made after notice and hearing, so that no unfairness is done to anyone.

however, is a fair hearing. Notice should be given to the, person who will be affected by

the order of requisitioning asking him to show why his accommodation should not be
requisitioned. 

In our view the scheme and setting of s. 3 imply a notice and hearing to the person who
will be affected by the proposed requisitioning order.

Servant is 'property' and that his pension cannot be reduced without giving him
a hearing even though the relevant service rules do not expressly provide for a hearing.

The accommodation was requisitioned by the District Magistrate

without notice and hearing. This Court quashed the order of requisition for want
of notice and hearing. One of us (A. N. Ray J.) said : "The principle of natural justice has
been applicable to administrative enquiries or quasi-judicial enquiries. It is the nature of
the power and circumstances and conditions under which it is exercised that will occa-
sion the invocation of the principle of natural justice. Deprivation of property affects
rights of a person. If under the Requisition Act the petitioner was to be deprived of the
occupation of the premises the District Magistrate had to hold an enquiry in order to
arrive at an opinion that there existed alternative accommodation for the petitioner or the
District Magistrate was to provide alternative accommodation.

 Daud Ahmad and K. R. Erry hold that in an enactment which deprives a person of his
property, there is necessarily implied the prerequisite of hearing. These cases support our
construction that notice and hearing to the affected party is necessarily implied in s. 3. It
is not disputed on behalf of the District Magistrate that the requisitioning order was made
by him without giving notice and hearing to the appellant. So we hold that his order is
illegal.

pointed out in the hearing notice

2. Audi alteram partem – no one should be condemned unheard.

This term paper deals with the second principle of natural justice. Right of fair hearing i.e.
audi alteram partem meaning one should not be condemned unheard.

Audi Alteram Partem: the rule of fair hearing

The principle of audi alteram partem is the basic concept of the principle of natural justice.
The omnipotency inherent in the doctrine is that no one should be condemned unheard. In
the field of administrative action, this principle has been applied to ensure fair play and
justice to affected persons. Its application depends upon the factual matrix to improve
administrative efficiency, expediency and to mete out justice.

implies fairness, reasonableness, equity and equality

If a petitioner/appellant/applicant is found guilty of concealment of material facts or making

an attempt to pollute the pure stream of justice, the court not only has the right but a duty
to summarily deny relief to such person to prevent an abuse of the process of law and reject
the Petition/Appeal on this ground alone without going to the merits of the case

It is of utmost importance that in making material statements and setting forth grounds in
applications for special leave made under Article 136 of the Constitution, care must be taken
not to make any statements which are inaccurate, untrue and misleading. In dealing with
applications for special leave, the Court naturally takes statements of fact and grounds of
fact contained in the petitions at their face value and it would be unfair to betray the
confidence of the Court by making statements which are untrue and misleading