WP 643/17 1 Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 643/2017
1. Sau.Smita W/o Roshan Gajbhiye,
Aged about 28 years, Occ. Household.
2. Raunak Roshan Gajbhiye,
Aged about 3½ years, Occ. Student,
Being minor through natural guardian
mother petitioner no.1.
Both R/o C/o Lalchand Patil, Wathoda Road,
Kuhi, Tahsil Kuhi, Dist. Nagpur. PETITIONERS
.....VERSUS.....
1. Roshan S/o Mukundaji Gajbhiye,
Aged about 35 years, Occ. Service.
2. Dhammakirti Mukundaji Gajbhiye,
Aged about 39 years, Occ. Service.
3. Sau.Vanita Dhamakirti Gajbhiye,
Aged about 33 years, Occ. Household.
All R/o Quarter No.8, Ordinance Factory,
Ambazari, Nagpur. RESPONDE
NTS
Shri H.N. Bhongade, counsel for the petitioners.
Mrs.Sonali Saware-Gadhawe, counsel for the respondents.
CORAM : REVATI MOHITE-DERE, J.
DATE : 31 ST OCTOBER, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT RULE. Rule is made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
2. By this criminal writ petition, the petitioners have impugned the order passed by the Principal District Judge, Nagpur dated 19.04.2017 below Exhibit 5 in Criminal Appeal No.11 of 2017. ::: Uploaded on - 03/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 04/11/2017 01:28:00 :::
WP 643/17 2 Judgment
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there was absolutely no justification for the Appellate Court to reduce the maintenance awarded by the trial Court, i.e. to reduce the maintenance from Rs.7,000/- to Rs.3,000/-.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submits that no interference is warranted in the impugned order, more particularly when the Appellate Court has posted the appeal for final arguments today. She further submits that the Appellate Court be directed to expeditiously dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioners alongwith the application for condonation of delay and the appeal filed by the respondents.
5. Perused the order dated 19.04.2017. Prima-facie, it appears that the learned Judge has not given any cogent reasons while passing the impugned order dated 19.04.2017, for reducing the maintenance amount awarded by the trial Court from Rs.7,000/- to Rs.3,000/-. However, since the appeal filed by the respondent as well as the appeal along with the application for condonation of delay is kept today for hearing, it is not necessary to consider the said petition on merits.
::: Uploaded on - 03/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 04/11/2017 01:28:00 :::
WP 643/17 3 Judgment
6. Accordingly, the learned Principal District Judge, Nagpur is requested to dispose of the appeal filed by the respondents and the appeal alongwith the application for condonation of delay filed by the petitioners as expeditiously as possible, and in any event within three weeks from today, on its own merits. The parties to cooperate in the disposal of the aforesaid appeals by not seeking unnecessary adjournments.
7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of on the aforesaid terms. The observation made is prima-facie and the learned Judge shall decide the appeals on its own merits, uninfluenced by the same. All contentions of both the parties are kept open.
8. All parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order.
JUDGE APTE ::: Uploaded on - 03/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 04/11/2017 01:28:00 :::