Disposed

Mr. Vilas Ramchandra Gangawane v. Mrs. Shama Vilas Gangawane and Anr.

Bombay HC27 Jul 2017CAM/27/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay disposed of a civil application by the husband seeking a stay on a Family Court order. The applicant undertook compliance with the injunction against disturbing possession and promised to deposit funds for daughters' marriage within the extended deadline.

What did the court decide?

Time granted up to 30-9-2017 to deposit Rs. 2 lacs.

Mr. Vilas Ramchandra Gangawane Vs Mrs. Shama Vilas… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

cam-27-16(902)

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.27 OF 2016 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 16 OF 2016

¶3

Mr. Vilas Ramchandra Gangawane ..Applicant Vs. Mrs. Shama Vilas Gangawane & Anr ..Respondents

¶4

Mr. Kalpesh Patil i/b Mr. A. R. Kapadnis for the Applicant None for the Respondents

¶5

CORAM :R. M. SAVANT, & SMT. SADHANA S JADHAV JJ DATE : 27^th JULY, 2017

¶6

P.C.

¶7

1 The above Civil Application has been filed seeking stay of the judgment and order dated 20-10-2015 passed by the Learned Judge of the Family Court No.4, Pune. By the said order, Petition No.C-14 of 2010 filed by the Respondent No.1 herein, came to be allowed. The operative part of the said order reads thus :

¶8

1 The Petition is allowed as under :-

¶9

2 The compromise between respondent nos.1 and 2 at Exh. 25 in P.B. No.16 /2007 before Family Court, Pune is hereby declared as null and void and not binding upon the petitioner.

¶10

3 Respondent no.2 is not entitled for half amount (50%) of family pension from the respondent no.1 Vilas Gangawane and medical benefits from the Railways.

¶11

4 Respondent no.1 and 2 and any person on

1 of 4

mmj

cam-27-16(902)

their behalf are hereby permanently restrained from disturbing the possession of the petitioner or creating any third party interest by way of sale, transfer, gift, mortgage, etc., in the flat No.26, Sonali Apartments, S. No.14, Anandnagar, Pune – 411051.

¶16

5 The claim of petitioner of monthly maintenance is rejected.

¶17

6 The respondent no.1 is directed to pay an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh only) to petitioner towards future marriage expenses of their two unmarried daughters.

¶18

7 Decree be drawn accordingly.

¶19

2 The Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant i.e. the Respondent No.1 to the Marriage Petition states that in so far as injunction granted in terms of clause (4) of the operative part is concerned, the Appellant undertakes not to disturb the possession of the Respondent No.1 or would not create any third party interest by way of sale, transfer, gift, mortgage, etc., in the flat No.26, Sonali Apartments, S. No.14, Anandnagar, Pune – 411051, during the lifetime of the Respondent No.1.

¶20

In so far as directions as contained in clause (6) thereof is concerned, the Learned Counsel Mr. Patil states that reasonable time may be granted to deposit the said amount. In the context of the injunction granted vide clause (4) as above, it is required to be noted that the Appellant and the Respondent No.1 have four children out of their marriage and all are daughters. We are informed that two daughters are already married and two

2 of 4

mmj

cam-27-16(902)

daughters i.e. Shilpa and Sulakshana are unmarried, both of them are employed according to the Appellant.

¶25

3 In view of the statement made by the Learned Counsel Mr. Patil on instructions of the Appellant who is personally present in Court both as regards the occupation of the flat in question by the Respondent No.1 during her lifetime as also his willingness to deposit the amount of Rs.2 lacs albeit subject to the extension of time to deposit the same, in our view, the above Civil Application works itself out and it is not necessary to consider the same for grant of any relief. Hence pending the hearing and final disposal of the above Family Court Appeal, the statement made by the Learned Counsel Mr. Patil would operate. In so far as the time to deposit the amount of Rs.2 lacs is concerned, the Appellant is granted time up to 30-9-2017 to deposit the said amount of Rs.2 lacs in the Family Court, Pune. On such deposit being made, the Respondent No.1 would invest the said amount in two fixed deposits in the name of each of the unmarried daughters in a nationalised bank initially for a period of two years and to be renewed thereafter till such time as the occasion arises to terminate the fixed deposits prematurely in the event of marriage of the daughters being fixed. If the Respondent No.1 does not act in accordance with the instant order, the same would be viewed strictly and then the Respondent No.1 would be liable for action for disobedience of this order. The Civil Application is accordingly disposed of.

3 of 4

mmj

cam-27-16(902)

4 However, it would be necessary to observe that in view of the statement made by the Learned Counsel Mr. Patil on behalf of the Appellant, infact the challenge in the Appeal would not survive and the concerned Court hearing the above Family Court Appeal at the relevant time may consider disposing of the Appeal in terms of the instant order.

¶30

[SMT SADHANA JADHAV, J]

¶31

[R.M.SAVANT, J]

¶32

4 of 4

¶33

mmj

Mr. Vilas Ramchandra Gangawane v. Mrs. Shama Vilas Gangawane and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Vilas Ramchandra Gangawane v. Mrs. Shama Vilas Gangawane and Anr.

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

Parashutam Shankar Kamble Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mr. Bhavesh Dinesh Doshi Vs Mrs. Mamta Bhavesh Doshi

Mr. Bhavesh Dinesh Doshi Vs Mrs. Mamta Bhavesh Doshi

Jeevan Saisiniprasad Kutturi Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dr Pardeshibalkrishnapatil Vs Ratnakr Gaikwad and 4 Others

Shri Jalindhar Dgondiba Kharabi Vs Dnyaneshwar Mahadeo Satav