Disposed¶16

Mrs.Shradha Amar Gosavi v. Mr. Amar Khushalgiri Gosavi

Bombay HC21 Jul 2025MCA/265/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Recall of transfer order; transfer of restitution application to Family Court Nasik held inappropriate; identical relief application pending in Pune Court; Family Court Nasik restitution order in applicant's favour (Application No. A560/2014) and respondent's non-compliance; subsequent Pune application a mischievous attempt to secure contradictory order; video conferencing appearance left to Family Court Pune on merits; liberty to file additional affidavit; Bombay High Court, Kamal Khata, J., order dated 6 August 2025; Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 265 of 2025.

What did the court decide?

The Order dictated in Court allowing transfer (passed 28th July 2025) is recalled and the matter stands adjourned; the Applicant's Advocate is granted liberty to press the Application by filing an additional affidavit, if necessary. ¶16

Mrs.Shradha Amar Gosavi vs Mr. Amar Khushalgiri Gosavi — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether it would be appropriate to direct a transfer of the restitution application to the Family Court at Nasik, in view of the pendency of an application seeking identical relief in the Pune Court and the earlier Nasik restitution order in the Applicant's favour. +1 more

¶10

Court's answer

The Family Court at Nasik has already decided the Application for Restitution in favour of the Applicant, which the Respondent has failed to comply with, and the subsequent application in the Pune Court appears to be a mischievous attempt to secure a contradictory order.

¶10

Ratio / Principle

In these circumstances, it would not be appropriate to direct a transfer to the Family Court at Nasik.

¶12

Key takeaways

Accordingly, the Order dictated in Court (allowing transfer, passed on 28th July 2025) is recalled and the matter stands adjourned.ratio¶16
Any application moved by the Applicant for appearance via Video Conferencing, highlighting difficulties in remaining physically present, shall be considered by the Family Court, Pune on its own merits.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Kamal Khata, J., 6 August 2025), Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 265 of 2025, Shradha Amar Gosavi v. Amar Khushalgiri Gosavi: The Court recalled its Order dated 28th July 2025 allowing transfer of a restitution application to the Family Court at Nasik. Upon reconciling the record, it found that the application sought to be transferred pertained to identical relief already sought in the Pune Court, and that the Family Court at Nasik had already decided the Application for Restitution (No. A560/2014) in favour of the Applicant, which the Respondent had failed to comply with; the subsequent Pune application appeared to be a mischievous attempt to secure a contradictory order. The matter was adjourned, with liberty to the Applicant's Advocate to press the Application with an additional affidavit if necessary; the Advocate indicated he would move the Family Court, Pune to bring on record the Nasik restitution order and the Respondent's continued non-compliance, and to seek appearance via Video Conferencing, which the Family Court, Pune was to consider on its own merits.

¶1

906-mca-265-2025.doc

¶2

Sbw

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 265 OF 2025

¶5

Shradha Amar Gosavi ... Applicant v/s. Amar Khushalgiri Gosavi ... Respondent _______________________

¶6

Mr. Amey R. Deshpande for the Applicant.

¶7

CORAM : KAMAL KHATA, J.

¶8

DATED : 6TH AUGUST 2025.

¶9

P.C. :

¶10

An Order allowing transfer was passed in Court on 28^th July 2025. However, upon reconciling the record with the Order, it has been discovered that the Application for restitution that is sought to be transferred, pertains to an application seeking identical relief in Pune Court. The Family Court at Nasik has already decided the Application for Restitution in favour of the Applicant, which the Respondent has failed to comply with. The subsequent Application appears to be a mischievous attempt to secure a contradictory order.

¶11

In these circumstances, it would not be appropriate to direct

¶12

a transfer to the Family Court at Nasik. Accordingly, the Order

¶13

1/2

¶14

Digitally signed SANDHYA by SANDHYABHAGU BHAGU WADHWA WADHWA Date:2025.08.11 10:51:14 +0530

¶15

906-mca-265-2025.doc

¶16

dictated in Court is recalled and the matter stands adjourned.

¶17

The Applicant’s Advocate submits that he will move an appropriate application before the Family Court, Pune to bring on record the Order of Restitution passed in favour of the Applicant passed by the Family Court, Nasik in the Application No.A560/2014, as well as the Respondent’s continued non-compliance. 4. The Applicant’s Advocate further submits that he will also move an application for appearance via Video Conferencing, highlighting any difficulties faced by the Applicant in remaining physically present. The Family Court, Pune shall consider such application on its own merits.

¶18

The Applicant’s Advocate is granted liberty to press this Application by filing an additional affidavit, if necessary.

¶19

(KAMAL KHATA, J.)

¶20

2/2

Mrs.Shradha Amar Gosavi v. Mr. Amar Khushalgiri Gosavi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs.Shradha Amar Gosavi v. Mr. Amar Khushalgiri Gosavi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

State of Maharashtra through the Special Land Acquisition Officer vs Kashinath Gopinath Bhoir

Gajanan Moreshwar Omkar vs Kusum Sudhakar Inamdar

The Cosmos Cooperative Bank Ltd. Through its Authorized Officer Shri Ratnakar Randive vs Ms Swastik Transport and Ors.

Parasram H Bhojwani vs Pravinchand Sehgal

Shahnawaz Ahmed S/O Enayat Waris vs Union of India

Veena Abhay Neman vs Abhay Vishne Neman