Partly allowed

Shri. Rajendra Vitthal Tayade v. Mrs. Usha Rajendra Tayade

Bombay HC30 Mar 2016CAM/28/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, while dismissing prayers in a civil application regarding a restoration of conjugal rights appeal, directed the Registrar to club a family court appeal with a criminal revision application before the Chief Justice.

What did the court decide?

The application was rejected. The Family Court Appeal No.192 of 2015 and Criminal Revision Application No.437 of 2015 are to be clubbed before the Chief Justice.

Shri. Rajendra Vitthal Tayade Vs Mrs. Usha Rajendra… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

FCA.192.2015

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.192 OF 2015

¶4

Rajendra Vitthal Tayade Appellant versus Mrs.Usha Rajendra Tayade Respondent

¶5

Mr.Prakash Namdeo Wagh for Appellant.

¶6

CORAM : A.S.OKA AND P.D.NAIK, JJ.

¶7

DATE : 30^th March 2016

¶8

PC :

¶9

Learned counsel appearing for the Appellant states that this appeal is confined to the decree passed in Petition No.A-210 of 2015 for the restitution of the conjugal rights.

¶10

The appeal is admitted. Printing is dispensed with. For the time being, paper book is also dispensed with.

¶11

MST

¶12

FCA.192.2015

¶13

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶14

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.328 OF 2015 IN

¶15

FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.192 OF 2015

¶16

Rajendra Vitthal Tayade

¶17

Applicant

¶18

versus

¶19

Mrs.Usha Rajendra Tayade Respondent

¶20

Mr.Prakash Namdeo Wagh for Applicant.

¶21

CORAM : A.S.OKA AND P.D.NAIK, JJ.

¶22

DATE : 30^th March 2016

¶23

PC :

¶24

Rule, returnable on 17^th June 2016. By way of adinterim relief, there will be stay of execution of the impugned decree passed only in Petition No.A-210 of 2015.

¶25

MST

¶26

FCA.192.2015

¶27

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶28

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.28 OF 2016

¶29

IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.192 OF 2015

¶30

Rajendra Vitthal Tayade versus Mrs.Usha Rajendra Tayade

¶31

Applicant

¶32

Respondent

¶33

Mr.Prakash Namdeo Wagh for Applicant.

¶34

CORAM : A.S.OKA AND P.D.NAIK, JJ. DATE : 30^th March 2016

¶35

PC :

¶36

Heard learned counsel for the Applicant. Prayers made in this application cannot be granted by this Bench. However, Family Court Appeal No.192 of 2015 and Criminal Revision Application No.437 of 2015 will have to be heard together.

¶37

As no relief can be granted by this Court in the present application, the same is rejected.

¶38

However, we direct that the Registrar, Judicial-(I) to place the Family Court Appeal No.192 of 2015 and Criminal Revision Application No.437 of 2015 before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice for passing order for clubbing the criminal revision application with family court appeal.

¶39

(P.D.NAIK, J.) (A.S.OKA, J.)

¶40

MST

Shri. Rajendra Vitthal Tayade v. Mrs. Usha Rajendra Tayade

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Rajendra Vitthal Tayade v. Mrs. Usha Rajendra Tayade

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

Vinay Sarawgi and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Naren Madanlal Sharma @ Arjun Bhatiya Vs Mohd Afzal Abdul Kalam Khan and Anr.

Surendra Manohar Parkhe and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Crystal Pride Developers Vs Laxmi Industrial Estate and Ors.

Prabodh J. Kothari Vs Vikram J. Kothari and 14 Ors.

Sou. Sonia Mahesh Gaikwad Vs Shri. Mahesh Baburao Gaikwad