SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Arjun S/O Abhimanyu Bawne vs Ranjana W/O Arjun Bawne on 22 July, 2019

1 WP4580-18
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

WRIT PETITION NO. 4580/2018
(ARJUN ABHIMANYU BAWNE VERSUS RANJANA ARJUN BAWNE)

———————————————————————————————-
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court’s or Judge’s orders
appearances, Court’s orders of directions
and Registrar’s orders
———————————————————————————————-
Shri V.D. Muley, counsel for petitioner.
Shri Deoul Pathak, counsel for respondent.

CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.

DATE : JULY 22, 2019.

The petitioner is aggrieved by an order passed by the
trial Court directing payment of maintenance pendente lite at the
rate of Rs.2,500/- per month.

The petitioner has filed proceedings for restitution of
conjugal rights in the year 2016. In those proceedings, the
respondent file an application under Section 24 of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955 seeking grant of interim maintenance. The trial
Court was pleased to award an amount of Rs.2,500/- per month as
maintenance pendente lite from the date of filing of the application.
Said order is challenged in the present writ petition.

When notice was issued by this Court on 10.12.2018,
the petitioner was directed to deposit an amount of Rs.20,000/- in
this Court within a period of one month to show his bona fides.
That amount has not yet been deposited.

::: Uploaded on – 22/07/2019 24/07/2019 01:49:39 :::

2 WP4580-18

Heard Shri V.D. Muley, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Shri Deoul Pathak, learned counsel for the
respondent. It is seen that the trial Court while taking a prima-facie
view of the matter has been pleased to award interim maintenance
at the rate of Rs.2,500/- per month. In absence of any other
material on record, I do not find it reasonable to interfere with the
impugned order. The proceedings are pending before the trial
Court wherein parties are free to lead their evidence in support of
their respective contentions.

Hence, by clarifying that the observations made in the
impugned order shall not prejudice the trial Court while deciding
the proceedings on merits, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No
costs.

JUDGE

APTE

::: Uploaded on – 22/07/2019 24/07/2019 01:49:39 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation