Court dismissed a writ petition challenging interim maintenance orders for minor children. It rejected requests to waive expense authentication and enhance maintenance, finding no illegality in Family Court orders.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE
WRIT PETITION NO. 6988 OF 2007
Mrs. Darshana P.Palwankar .... Petitioner
versus
mr.Pradip C.Palwankar ...... Respondent.
Mrs.Smita Telang for the petitioner.
Mr. V.B. Naik i/b I.M.Khairadi for respondent.
CORAM; A.P. DESHPANDE, J.
DATED; 23RD OCTOBER, 2007
P.C.;
1. Three interlocutory orders are challenged in the
present Writ Petition. The first one is dated
11-8-2006, which proceeds to grant the daughter who is
a minor child studying in 10th standard, the
maintenance of Rs.5,000/- from the father. The
children are in custody of the mother and the mother
is also earning a salary in the sum of Rs.11,500/-.
The next order is dated 6-1-2007. The said order
pertains to rejection of the Review Application. The
Family Court has observed that the father has
volunteered to bear the educational expenses of the
son, while passing the order dated 11-8-2006 and that
the same are being paid regularly and hence the
application for review came to be rejected. The last
order is an order passed below Exh.14 and 15 rejecting
the request of the petitioner wife for stay of the
proceedings and also for modification of the first
order. The petitioner is claiming additional amount
of interim maintenance for the children.
2. Perusal of the order passed below Exh.14 and 15
reveals that the husband is bearing the educational
expenses of his son, on production of requisite
statement of his expenses, college fees, duly signed
and authenticated by the Principal of the said
institute. Impugned orders do not suffer from any
illegality, requiring any interference at the hands of
this court in exercise of writ jurisdiction. Two fold
submissions are made by the counsel for the
petitioner. The first is for dispensing with the
condition of authentication of the educational
expenses by the Principal and the second is in
relation to the amount of interim maintenance to be
enhanced for the daughter. There is absolutely no
need to vary the impugned order. The same takes
correct view of the matter. In the result, the Writ
Petition is summarily dismissed.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to dispense with authentication of educational expenses by the Principal or enhance interim maintenance for the daughter.
Mrs. Darshana P. Palwankar
mr. Pradip C. Palwankar
A.P. Deshpande
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court