Disposed

Mrs. Jayashree Chandrashekhar Pawar @ Jayashree Gunvant Khairnar v. Mr. Chandrashekhar P. Pawar

Bombay HC27 Oct 2021WP/1688/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A wife petitioner appealed the rejection of her application to stay matrimonial proceedings due to ill-health. The Court, concerned about the nearly nine-year delay, directed the appointment of a Court Commissioner to record her evidence at her residence in Dhule, with a timeline of six weeks.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition was disposed of. The Civil Judge at Dhule directed to appoint a Commissioner to record the petitioner's evidence at her residence in Dhule within six weeks.

Mrs. Jayashree Chandrashekhar Pawar @ Jayashree… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

1/4 28 WP 1688-21.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1688 OF 2021

¶3

Mrs.Jayashree Chandrashekhar Pawar @ Jayashree Gunvant Khairnar .. Petitioner Versus Chandrashekhar P. Pawar .. Respondent

¶4

Mr. Kamlesh P. Mali for the petitioner. Mr. Kuldeep U. Nikam for the respondent.

¶5

CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 27^th OCTOBER 2021.

¶6

P.C:-

¶7

1 My attention is invited to an error in the order dated 20/10/2021 wherein the date of rejection of the application is mentioned as 10/2/2019. It stand corrected to 10/2/2020.

¶8

2 Petition is filed by a wife who is a respondent in Marriage Petition No. 180 of 2012 pending in the Court of Civil Judge, Sr. Division, Vasai filed by the respondent husband, seeking dissolution of marriage.

¶9

3 The present petition is filed, being aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Civil Judge, Sr. Division, Vasai on 10^th Tilak

¶10

2/4 28 WP 1688-21.doc

¶11

February 2020 on an application filed by the petitioner below Exhibit-197, praying for staying of the proceedings on account of the ill-health of the petitioner and by stating that there is no certainty as to when she would recover from the ailment and would be in a position to attend the Court proceedings for recording her evidence. On the last date of hearing i.e. 20^th October 2021, I have passed the following order :-

¶12

“1. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in the wake of the rejection of her application on 10/02/2020 for deferring the proceedings in the Divorce Petition, shall take instructions whether her evidence can be recorded through the Court Commissioner, since she is residing at Dhule and also on the ground that she is not in a position to stand in the witness box on account of the multiple surgeries, which she undergone.

¶13

To enable the counsel to take necessary instructions, re-notify for 27/10/2021”.

¶14

4 Today, counsel for the petitioner fairly state that the petitioner is not averse to the appointment of Commissioner for recording of evidence provided the evidence is recorded at her residence in Dhule. He is also slightly wary of the health condition of the petitioner and his only submission is to the effect that the Court Commissioner should be little flexible with the timings, as well as the duration for which the petitioner would be required to be examined.

¶15

Tilak

¶16

3/4 28 WP 1688-21.doc

¶17

5 Considering the precarious health position of the petitioner, I deem it fit that the Civil Judge, Sr. Division, Dhule shall appoint a Commissioner for recording of evidence of the petitioner and the learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the respondent State that they would arrive at a consensus about the name of the person to be appointed as Commissioner, who, shall be then deputed for the purpose of recording of evidence of the petitioner. The evidence preferably shall be recorded on day-to-day basis and if not, except for some exceptional reason, it is not possible on account of ill-health of the petitioner for her to sustain the pressure of the evidence on dayto-day basis, request can be made to the Commissioner to defer it for a shorter date as the time may permit. However, it is made clear that in any case, attempt shall be made to conclude within a period of six weeks from the date of appointment of the Commissioner.

¶18

6 Since it is informed that the next date of hearing fixed by the learned Judge is 13^th November 2021, the respective counsel submit that on the said date of hearing, they shall put an appearance and suggest the name of the Court Commissioner by consent, who shall then carry out the directions issued by this Court as above and record the evidence of the petitioner in the matter indicated above.

¶19

Tilak

¶20

4/4 28 WP 1688-21.doc

¶21

7 With the aforesaid direction, Writ Petition is disposed off.

¶22

8 Parties shall keep in mind that the petition is pending before the Court more than 9 years and they will make every endeavour to conclude the said proceedings at the earliest.

¶23

SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J

¶24

Tilak

Mrs. Jayashree Chandrashekhar Pawar @ Jayashree Gunvant Khairnar v. Mr. Chandrashekhar P. Pawar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs. Jayashree Chandrashekhar Pawar @ Jayashree Gunvant Khairnar v. Mr. Chandrashekhar P. Pawar

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

Sou. Meenal Manik Yedur and Anr. Vs Sou. Satyamma Krishnahari Singam and Anr.

Ashok Choudhary Decd Thru Lhrs Vs Smt. Kashmira Niranjan Petigara and Ors.

Mr. Nitin Ramrao Umale Vs Prakash Shankar Pawar Decd through Lrs

Ashish Amrut Sawane @ Ashish Amarappa Sawale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Priyanka Srikant Kamurti Vs Srikant Siddheshwar Kamurti

Vijaylakshmi Avinash Kadam Vs Avinash Pandurang Kadam