Dismissed

Sachin Jaywant Bhawar v. Priya Sachin Bhawar

Bombay HC14 Mar 2011WP/6204/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil writ petition, the High Court refused to interfere with an ex-parte interim maintenance order granted to the respondent-wife. The Court directed the petitioner to approach the trial court for modification due to changed circumstances, holding no merits-based views were required at this stage.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 8 April 2010 upheld; directed petitioner to approach trial court for modification on changed circumstances.

Sachin Jaywant Bhawar Vs Priya Sachin Bhawar — Maintenance and Alimony | Bombay HC (2011)

cwp-6204-10=.sxw

: 1 :

USJ

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6204 OF 2010

¶6

Sachin Jaywant Bhawar .. Petitioner

¶7

v/s.

¶8

Priya Sachin Bhawar .. Respondent

¶9

Mr. Prashant D. Patil for the petitioner

¶10

CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATE : 14^th MARCH, 2011

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that respondent is the wife of the petitioner. Respondent is absent. Hence, I am entertaining this petition at the stage of admission itself.

¶13

Respondent-wife filed a Petition in the Court of 7^th Joint Civil Judge Senior Division, Pune for divorce being Marriage Petition No.736 of 2009.

¶14

In the said petition, the respondent filed an Application at Exh.5 for maintenance. The said application was decided by the learned Judge before whom the said application was pending and by order dated 8^th April, 2010 he ordered that the petitioner should pay to the

¶15

: 2 : cwp-6204-10=.sxw

¶16

respondent Rs.7,500/- per month by way of interim maintenance from the date of the said Application at Exh.5 till disposal of the main proceedings. Cost for litigation expenses of Rs.5,000/- has also been awarded.

¶17

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the order at Exh.5 dated 8^th April, 2010 was passed ex-parte. Learned Counsel for the petitioner tried to explain as to why he remained absent before the learned Judge. The explanation given across the bar cannot be accepted. It appears that the learned Judge granted some time to enable the petitioner to remain present. However, the petitioner did not respond and ultimately learned Judge had no alternative but to pass the order of maintenance. In my view, right at this juncture, there is no need to interfere in the order on the basis that it is an ex-parte order. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that as of today, the petitioner is working with a firm known as Amrutraj Prakashan and he is working as a Marketing Executive and earning a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month. According to the petitioner, on account of change of circumstances, the petitioner is unable to comply with the order dated 8^th April, 2010 by which he has been ordered to pay Rs.7,500/- per month. To my mind, this happens to be the change of circumstance. Hence, as per normal

¶18

cwp-6204-10=.sxw

¶19

: 3 :

¶20

principles, petitioner is free to make an application to the learned Judge, 7^th Civil Judge Senior Division, Pune for modification of the order dated 8^th April, 2010 by making proper application.

¶21

In view of the above, following order is passed to dispose of the petition at the ad-interim stage.

¶22

ORDER

¶23

(i) No interference is called for in the order dated 8^th April, 2010 passed by learned 7^th Civil Judge Senior Division, Pune. If the petitioner files an application before the learned Judge for modification of the order on account of changed circumstances, the learned Judge shall decide the said application on merits as expeditiously as possible.

¶24

(ii) No views are expressed on merits of any application which will be made. Till the application is disposed of, order dated 8^th April 2011 shall operate against the petitioner. There shall be no order

¶25

as to costs.

¶26

(R.Y.GANOO, J.)

Sachin Jaywant Bhawar v. Priya Sachin Bhawar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin Jaywant Bhawar v. Priya Sachin Bhawar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepa Mahadev Shinde Vs Mahadev Laxman Shinde

Tushar Digambar Parulekar Vs Sonal Dohsi ( Advocate and Solicitor)

1. Shashipal Shankar and Ors. Vs 1. Shirin Cawasji Vazifdar and Anr.

Abraham Titus Vs Suzette June Titus

Jitendra Shantilal Panchal Vs Reshma J. Panchal

Mehajbin Mujammil Shaikh and Anr. Vs Mujammil Rahim Shaikh and Anr.