A single judge held it unnecessary to interfere with an order granting interim maintenance. The petitioner was directed to pay the balance sum within four weeks and approach the trial court for an expeditious hearing regarding prolonged proceedings.
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.
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 8802 OF 2007
Maruti Bharamana Patil...Petitioner
Versus
Vanita Maruti Patil and anr.....Respondents
S.S.Redekar for the petitioner.
S.S.Patwardhan for respondent no.1.
CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.
4th December, 2007.
P.C. :
1. In my view, it is not necessary to interfere with
the order granting interim maintenance at this stage.
If the petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that the
contesting respondents/plaintiffs are filing
proceedings after proceedings only to harass him and
recover some amounts from him, that aspect is open for
being agitated during the pendency of the proceedings.
Further, the petitioner can point out to the trial
court that the proceedings are unreasonably and
:2:
unnecessarily prolonged only to extract sums and monies
from the present petitioner. The petitioner has
already paid Rs.25,000/-. He should pay the balance
sum as awarded within a period of four weeks from today
and thereafter apply to the trial court for expeditious
hearing of the suit and such an application if made
shall be considered by the Trial court on its own
merits. Further, the Trial court to also consider the
grievance of the present petitioner that he is unable
to pay the sum as awarded at an interim stage. If the
petitioner desires any modification in that behalf he
is always at liberty to apply and even such an
application should be dealt in accordance with law.
Petition dismissed. No costs.
SD/-
********
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the order granting interim maintenance at this stage.
Whether the petitioner can approach the trial court to delay proceedings if they are prolonged to extract sums.
Maruti Bharamana Patil
Vanita Maruti Patil
Respondent no 2
SC. DHARMADHIKARI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court