Disposed

Avinash Nivrutti Mali v. Poonam Avinash Mali

Bombay HC3 Mar 2023WP/2553/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge disposed of a writ petition challenging the forfeiture of the petitioner's right to lead evidence by the Family Court, Satara, while issuing an interlocutory order to transmit the case and evidence procedure to the Family Court.

What did the court decide?

Family Court directed to complete evidence and decide petition within three months after petitioner examines two witnesses.

Avinash Nivrutti Mali Vs Poonam Avinash Mali — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

40-wp2553-2023.doc

¶2

AGK

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.2553 OF 2023

¶5

Digitally signed byATUL ATULGANESH GANESHKULKARNI KULKARNI Date: 2023.03.04 13:12:58 +0530

¶6

Avinash Nivrutti Mali… Petitioner
V/s.

¶7

Poonam Avinash Mali… Respondent

¶8

Mr. Dilip Devadiga i/by Mr. Sanjay D. Gaikwad for the
petitioner.

¶9

Mr. Kuldeep U. Nikam for the respondent.

¶10

CORAM:AMIT BORKAR, J.

¶11

DATED:MARCH 3, 2023

¶12

P.C.:

¶13

1.By the impugned order, Family Court, Satara has forfeited
right of the petitioner to lead evidence since the petitioner was not
ready on the date of passing of the order to lead evidence.

¶14

2.Learned advocate for the petitioner states that his first
witness shall remain present before the Family Court, Satara on
the next scheduled date. On that day, the petitioner shall complete
his examination-in-chief. Learned advocate for the respondent
shall complete his cross-examination on that day or on the next
date.

¶15

3.On the next date after the scheduled date, the petitioner
shall examine second witness and the respondent shall complete
the cross-examination on that day or on the next date.

¶16

¶17

40-wp2553-2023.doc

¶18

4.The Family Court, Satara shall thereafter hear arguments of
the parties and decide the petition within three (3) months from
the date of completion of evidence by the parties.

¶19

5.Except two witnesses which the petitioner intends to
examine, no other witness shall be allowed.

¶20

6.This order will not confer right on the petitioner to examine
the witnesses which were discarded by this Court by order dated
3rd February 2023.

¶21

7.The writ petition stands disposed of in above terms. No
costs.

¶22

(AMIT BORKAR, J.)

¶23

Avinash Nivrutti Mali v. Poonam Avinash Mali

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avinash Nivrutti Mali v. Poonam Avinash Mali

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Maharashtra (through the Special Land Acquisition Officer) and Anr. Vs Shri Baliram Dattaram Dalavi

Pradeep Bhalchandra Keer Vs Vivek Anant Keer and Ors.

M/S. Pradhan Hill Resorts through Its Partner Mr.Aziz a. Pradhan and Anr. Vs Girish @ Gourishankar Bhorilal Khandelwal and Othrs

Mrs. Shubhangi (Neeta) Pravin Padalkar Vs Mr. Pravin (Popat) Atmaram Padalkar

Manisha Talgeri Mulgaon, Nee- Manisha Sharad Talgeri Vs Mithil Subhash Mulgaonkar

Tausif Salim Patel Vs Wasima Tausif Patel and Anr.