← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/1235/2002rule discharged

Meghana Sanjeev Ranade v. Sanjeev Vyankatesh Ranade

2015-11-20Hon'Ble Shri Justice M.S. Sonak2 pages

skc 205-WP-1235-02

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1235 OF 2002 Meghana Sanjeev Ranade ..

Petitioner vs.

Sanjeev V. Ranade ..

Respondent None for Petitioner.

None for Respondent.

CORAM : M. S. SONAK, J.

DATE: 20 NOVEMBER 2015 P.C. :- 1] Neither of the parties nor their Advocates are present. Earlier, this petition had been dismissed for non prosecution but the same was restored. Today when the matter is called out, neither the Petitioner nor her Advocate is present. However, since the petition is of the year 2002, it is appropriate that the same is disposed of after taking into consideration the grievance raised in the petition, rather than dismissed for non prosecution. 2] On 3 July 2002, Rule was issued in this petition but interim relief was refused.

3] The challenge in this petition is to the order dated 14 December 2001 in Petition C. No. 55/2001 made by the Family Court awarding interim maintenance of only Rs.2,000/- per month to the Petitioner instead of Rs.10,000/- per month as claimed. 1/2

skc 205-WP-1235-02 4] At this point of time, it is reasonable to infer that the main petition has itself been disposed of, in which case, this petition is rendered infructuous. In fact, there is on record a letter addressed by the Respondent to this Court which states that the proceedings are disposed of on 21 July 2011.

5] In the aforesaid circumstances, this petition is disposed of as infructuous. If however, the proceedings before the Family Court are still pending and the Petitioner is desirous of pursuing this matter, liberty is granted to the Petitioner to apply for restoration after furnishing sufficient cause for non appearance. 6] For the present, this petition is disposed of as infructuous. Rule is accordingly discharged. There shall be no order as to costs. 7] Since neither of the parties nor their Advocates have appeared, the Registry is directed to transmit authenticated copy of this order to the concerned Family Court. This shall be done as early as possible and in any case within a period of four weeks from today.

8] All concerned to act on basis of authenticated copy of this order.

(M. S. SONAK, J.) Chandka 2/2