Petitioner husband filed a writ petition assailing an interim maintenance order. The High Court disposed of the petition as infructuous because the main maintenance proceedings had concluded before the writ challenge was addressed.
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.
15_wp_3419_2013.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE – CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3419 OF 2013
Milind Harishchandra Chavan Vs.
Mrs. Manasi Milind Chavan & Anr.
.... Petitioner .... Respondents
Mr. S.R. Gaud, for the Petitioner Mr. Jitendra Mulik, for Respondent No.1 Mrs. A.A. Mane, APP for the Respondent No.2State
CORAM: P.D. KODE, J.
DATED: DECEMBER 04, 2014
P.C:
Megha 1 of 2
15_wp_3419_2013.doc
liberty has been given to the Respondent No.1 to file appropriate proceedings.
the main proceedings for maintenance are over. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.1 has also admitted the said position.
order passed in the maintenance proceedings does not survive.
Megha 2 of 2
Milind Harishchandra Chavan
Mrs. Manasi Milind Chavan
P.D. Kode
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
