Disposed

Bhatendra Kumar Gupta v. Saurabhi Bharatendra Gupta

Bombay HC5 Jan 2023WP/3824/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Held that while statutory right to review cannot be obstructed, the Court can impose terms in interest of justice; petitioner directed to deposit arrears within one week to enable Family Court to decide review application.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to deposit arrears as ordered by Family Court within one week for Family Court to decide review application.

Bhatendra Kumar Gupta Vs Saurabhi Bharatendra Gupta — Maintenance and Alimony | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

7-wp3824-2022.doc

¶2

VRJ

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.3824 OF 2022

¶5

Bhartendra Kumar Gupta… Petitioner
V/s.

¶6

Surabhi Bharatendra Gupta… Respondent

¶7

Ms. Astha Tahmankar a/w Ms. Khursheed Vajifdar &
Ms. Rahat Kalpatri i/by Legasis Partners for the
petitioner.

¶8

Ms.Persis Sidhva for the respondent.

¶9

CORAM :AMIT BORKAR, J.

¶10

DATED:JANUARY 5, 2023

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

1.The petition is directed against an order directing the
husband to deposit arrears of maintenance to entertain challenge
in relation to the direction to the husband to pay maintenance and
educational expenses of the children and pocket money of the
elder child.

¶13

2.The learned Family Court by the impugned order directed
the petitioner to deposit entire arrears before the review
application is entertained.

¶14

3.According to the petitioner, such direction is unreasonable as
the statutory right of the petitioner to file review cannot be taken

¶15

¶16

7-wp3824-2022.doc

¶17

away by imposing such unreasonable condition.

¶18

4.The petitioner has invoked writ jurisdiction of this Court
under article 227 of the Constitution of India. To entertain
challenge to the order passed by the learned Family Court, this
Court while exercising extraordinary constitutional power can
always put the parties to terms which are necessary in the interest
of justice. Since the direction which is challenged in the petition
meets substantial justice, in my opinion, the petition can be
disposed of by directing the petitioner to deposit arrears in terms
of order impugned within one (1) week from today.

¶19

5. If the petitioner deposits the arrears of amount as directed by the learned Family Court, the learned Family Court shall decide the review application in accordance with law.

¶20

6. The writ petition is disposed of in above terms. No costs.

¶21

(AMIT BORKAR, J.)

¶22

Bhatendra Kumar Gupta v. Saurabhi Bharatendra Gupta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhatendra Kumar Gupta v. Saurabhi Bharatendra Gupta

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

Shivalik Ventures Vs Adarsh Developers and Ors.

Lalaji Namdeo Kumbhar and Anr. Vs Vishwanath Sukinda Kumbhar and Ors.

Matru Chhaya Cooperative Society Limited and Ors. Vs Mr. Allan Mathew Misquitta and Ors.

Mrs. Neeta Yogesh Patankar Vs Mr. Yogesh Yuvraj Patankar

Mrs. Lisha Abhay Jagtap Vs Abhay Kamlakar Jagtap

Swati Sachin Potdar Vs Sachin Sunil Potdar and Anr.