Vishal Sunilbhai Patadiya v. Nikita Preavinbhai Patadiya

Mujahed 1/2 3-wp-10597-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 10597 OF 2017 Vishal Sunilbhai Patadiya ....

Petitioner Vs.

Nikita Preavinbhai Patadiya ....

Respondent Ms. Akshata B. Desai I/b. Nitin Sejpal for the Petitioner. None for the Respondent.

Coram : G.S. KULKARNI, J.

Date : 21 DECEMBER 2017 P.C:

1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2.

By the impugned order which is titled as an ADHOC order below Exhibit-18, there is a direction by the Family Court to the petitionerhusband to pay Rs. 4,600/- towards travelling expenses, Rs. 400/- towards miscellaneous expenses and 2000/- towards lodging expenses of the respondent-wife for every date on which she is personally present for hearing.

It is not in dispute that the respondent-wife is required to travel from Pune to Ahmedabad to attend the proceedings. In Para 2 of the order, the learned trial Judge has taken into account every head of

Mujahed 2/2 3-wp-10597-2017 expenditure.

3.

Considering the nature of the order passed, in my opinion no inference would be called for. It is a reasonable and an appropriate order. Writ petition is devoid of merits, it is accordingly rejected. 4.

If the impugned order is not complied by the petitioner, the respondent is at liberty to take appropriate steps to execute the order. (G.S. KULKARNI, J.)