Sou. Rohini Digambar Wachakawade v. Digambar Dyaneshwar Wachakawade

1 MCA 109-2017.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABA MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 109 of 2017 Rohini W/o Digambar Wachakkawade ...APPLICANT

VERSUS

Digambar S/o Dnyaneshwar Wachakawade ...RESPONDENT Mr K.J. Tandale, Advocate for applicant.

CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

DATE :3rd October, 2017 ORAL ORDER :

Heard learned Counsel for the applicant.

2.

In view of affidavit of service, on 19th September 2017 this Court observed that service to the respondent is complete. 3.

So as to enable to give one more chance, the matter is posted for hearing on adjourned date i.e. for today. 4.

None appears for the respondent.

2 MCA 109-2017. 5.

The applicant has come out with a specific case that applicant is having custody of six months, old child and it will be difficult for her to attend the proceedings at Pune.

6.

Since other contentions in the application are not controverted, in my opinion, considering hardship and convenience of the applicant, application needs to be allowed in terms of prayer clause "C".

7.

As such, the application stands allowed in terms of Prayer Clause "C".

( NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.) pjm