Disposed

Anuja Santosh Bidve v. Santosh Dattatray Bidve

Bombay HC9 Jul 2015WP/7555/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the rejection of interim maintenance under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act. The Court directed the Family Court to expedite the recording of evidence, specifically the remaining three witnesses of the husband, before a strict deadline.

What did the court decide?

Disposed of the petition; directed Family Court to complete evidence and conclude the matter by 15th August 2015.

Anuja Santosh Bidve Vs Santosh Dattatray Bidve — Maintenance and Alimony | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

3-wp-7555-2014.doc

¶2

Vishal

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.7555 OF 2014

¶5

Anuja Santosh Bidve ... Petitioner vs. Santosh Dattatray Bidve ... Respondent

¶6

Mrs. Anuja Santosh Bidve, the Petitioner in Person. Mrs. Geeta Mulekar, for the Respondent.

¶7

CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE: JULY 09, 2015

¶8

P.C.:

¶9

. The Petition is filed challenging the order dated 6^th March,

¶10

2014 of the Family Court, Pune rejecting the interim maintenance to the Petitioner/wife. The original Petition is filed by the wife under Section 18 and 20 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956. The Petitioner/wife is getting Rs. 15,000/-p.m. as per the order of the Judicial Magistrate F. C., Pune in the proceeding under the Domestic Violence Act.

¶11

At the time of hearing this Petition, it is informed by the

¶12

1 / 3

¶13

3-wp-7555-2014.doc

¶14

learned counsel for Respondent/husband that the Family Court has recorded the evidence of the Petitioner and her four witnesses till now and three witnesses of Respondent/husband are yet to be examined. The learned counsel for the Respondent/husband informed the Court that these three witnesses are on very short point and their evidence can be over in a day. This fact is confirmed by the Petitioner/wife.

¶15

Considering the status of the original Petition and as the substantial evidence is recorded by the Family Court, it is appropriate to dispose of this Petition without considering the merits of the matter and going into the legality of the impugned order of the Family Court. The parties informed that the matter is fixed for recording of evidence on 17^th July, 2015.

¶16

In view of this, the Petition is disposed of with the following order:

¶17

a) The learned Judge, Family Court, Pune is requested to complete the evidence of the witnesses of the Respondent/husband on 17^th and 20^th July,

¶18

2 / 3

¶19

3-wp-7555-2014.doc

¶20

2015 and endeavor to conclude the matter on or

¶21

before 15^th August, 2015.

¶22

The Petition is disposed of with these terms.

¶23

(MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

¶24

3 / 3

Anuja Santosh Bidve v. Santosh Dattatray Bidve

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anuja Santosh Bidve v. Santosh Dattatray Bidve

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Bhanudas Eknath Kotkar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Paul Joseph Shirole Vs State of Maharashtra

Dinesh S/O Jumman Godale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sandeep Toshniwal Vs Dr. Ashrita Toshniwal

Ms. Annie Kurien nee Sebastian Vs Mrs. Rachana Prasad Acharya and Anr.

Mrs. Nutan Shankar Moily Vs Mr. Shankar Ramanna Moily