Archana W/O Sanjay Nandanwar v. Sanjay S/O Sudhakar Nandanwar

1 fca46.19

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 46 OF 2019 (ARCHANA SANJAY NANDANWAR...VS.. SANJAY SUDHAKAR NANDANWAR) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court'

s or Judge'

s orders appearances, Court'

s orders of directions and Registrar'

s orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Smt. J.D.Dharmadhikari, Advocate for Appellant. CORAM : Z.A.HAQ AND PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, JJ.

DATED : OCTOBER 01, 2019.

Heard.

Respondent (husband) has filed petition before the Family Court seeking reliefs in the following terms: "i) to pass a decree of divorce dissolving the marriage dated 10/07/2000 solemnized between the petitioner and the respondent.

ii) pass money decree against the respondent to return the amount Rs.3,50,000/- with interest @ 24% p.a. till its realization.

iii) to grant maintenance & Rs.20,000/- p.m.

to son Akshat;

iv) to grant any other relief deems fit & proper;

v) to allow the petition with costs."

The appellant(wife) had filed an application (Exh.59) under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure contending that the prayer clause (ii) cannot be granted by Family Court inasmuch as the Family Court is not having jurisdiction to adjudicate such grievance and grant such relief to the party. This application is dismissed by the impugned order.

2 fca46.19 After examining the controversy, we find that the prayer clause (i) of the petition that '

decree of divorce dissolving the marriage between the parties be passed' can be considered by the Family Court. It is well settled that while considering the application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, plaint/petition cannot be rejected in its entirety if some relief sought by the plaintiff/petitioner can be granted by the concerned Court.

We find that the learned trial Judge has properly appreciated the controversy. It cannot be said that the impugned order suffers from illegality or infirmity which necessitates interference by this Court.

Hence, the appeal is dismissed. No costs.

JUDGE JUDGE RRaut..