Dismissed

Shivaji Bajirao Patil v. Smt. Nilabai Samadhan Patil and Ors.

Bombay HC24 Mar 2023WP/2226/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an interim maintenance order of Rs.4,000/month awarded to the daughter-in-law in a pending partition suit. Finding the order operated for eight years and the suit pending for nine years, the Court declined interference.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition dismissed. No order as to costs. Petitioner directed to approach the trial court for expeditious hearing.

Shivaji Bajirao Patil Vs Smt. Nilabai Samadhan Patil… — Maintenance and Alimony | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

k 1/2 20_wp_2226.16_as.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.2226 OF 2016

¶4

Shivaji Bajirao Patil . ....Petitioner V/S Nilabai Samadhan Patil & Ors. ....Respondents

¶5

Ms. Manjiri S. Parasnis for the Petitioner.

¶6

CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATE : 24 MARCH 2023.

¶7

P.C.:

¶8

1 By this Petition Petitioner challenges order dated 17 January 2013

¶9

passed by the Civil Judge Junior Division, Jat in Regular Civil Suit No.101 of 2014.

¶10

2 Regular Civil Suit No.101 of 2014 is filed by the widow daughter-inlaw of the Petitioner/Defendant No.1 for partition, separate possession, injunction, mesne profits and declaration. In that suit Plaintiff filed Application at Exhibit 12 for interim maintenance of Rs.10,000/- for herself and for her daughter from Defendant No.1/Petitioner. By order dated 17 January 2015, the trial Court has awarded interim maintenance at the rate of Rs.4,000/- per month to the Plaintiff from the date of Application.

¶11

1/2

¶12

katkam

¶13

k 2/2 20_wp_2226.16_as.doc

¶14

3 The trial Court has observed that the Defendant No.1 is in possession

¶15

of agricultural land and earning income out of the same. That Plaintiff has no source of income to take care of herself and her daughter. Considering these factors the trial Court has deemed it fit to award interim maintenance of Rs.4,000/- per month.

¶16

4 The impugned order is passed on 17 January 2015.

¶17

5 Though this Petition is lodged on 10 March 2015, no interim order is passed in the present Petition. Considering the reasons recorded by the trail Court and also the fact that the impugned order is in operation for the last 8 long years, I do not think this to be a fit case warranting interference by this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution. The Regular Civil Suit No.101 of 2014 has been pending for last 9 years. The Petitioner can instead make efforts before the trial Court for expeditious hearing. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.

¶18

(SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.)

¶19

2/2

¶20

katkam

Shivaji Bajirao Patil v. Smt. Nilabai Samadhan Patil and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivaji Bajirao Patil v. Smt. Nilabai Samadhan Patil and Ors.

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

Girish C. Lodha vs Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-Operative Societies, Mumbai Division

Gopal Dinkar Vanave vs Apex Grievance Redressal Committee S.R.A.

Anirban Gupta Roy and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra Thr Government Pleader and Ors.

Shri. Ganpat Punja Wagh Vs Santu Barku Pingal and Ors.

Susheela Munshi Power of Attorny Holder Mr. Sanjeev Munshi Vs Pallithara Mary Paulson

C.P. Mohandas Vs Vijay Tukaram Raundal and Anr.