Bombay High Court
Abdul Kadir S/O Abdul Khaliq vs Rozina Tabassum Dv/O Abdul Kadir ... on 13 July, 2017
Bench: V.M. Deshpande
revn.82.17&97.16 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
(1)CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 82 OF 2017
1) Rozina Tabassum W/o Abdul Qadir,
Aged about 25 years,Occ-household,
2) Master Arhan S/o Abdul Kadir,
Aged about 21 months(minor) through
non-applicant no.1, being her lawful
guardian.
Both R/o-C/o Plot no.360,Guruprasad
nagar, Dattawari,Nagpur. ..... APPLICANTS
...V E R S U S...
Abul Kakdir S/o Abdul Khaliq,
Aged about 33 years,
Occupation-Manager in Berger Paints,
R/o Flat No.205,A-Wing,
2nd Floor, Shiv nagar, Shiv Apartment,
Godhni Road, Zingabai Takli,Nagpur. ... RESPONDENTS
AND
(2) CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 97 OF 2016
Abul Kakdir S/o Abdul Khaliq,
Aged about 33 years,
Occupation-Manager in Berger Paints,
R/o Flat No.205,A-Wing,
2nd Floor, Shiv nagar, Shiv Apartment,
Godhni Road, Zingabai Takli,Nagpur. ..... APPLICANTS
...V E R S U S...
::: Uploaded on - 15/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 16/07/2017 00:21:56 :::
revn.82.17&97.16 2
1) Rozina Tabassum divorcee of Abdul Qadir,
Aged about 25 years,Occ-household,
2) Master Arham S/o Abdul Kadir,
Aged about minor through
guardian Rozina Tabassum i.e.
non-applicant no.1.
Both R/o-C/o Plot no.360,Guruprasad
nagar, Dattawari,Nagpur. ... RESPONDENTS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri J.D.Bastian,Advocate for Abdul Kadir S/o Abdul Khaliq.
Shri Rohit Masurkar,Advocate for Rozina Tabassum and another.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:- V. M. DESHPANDE, J.
DATED :- JULY 13,2017
ORAL JUDGMENT
Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally
by consent of learned counsel for the parties.
2. Revision no.97/2016 is filed by applicant Abdul Kadir-
husband . He is challenging the order passed by learned Judge of
the Family Court No.4,Nagpur below Exh.6 in Petition
No.E216/2015 by which learned Judge of the Court below
directed him to pay maintenance amount of Rs. 5000/- per
month to the wife- nonapplicant no.1 Rozina and Rs. 2000/- per
month in favour of th non-applicant no.2 Arhan.
3. Revision no.82/2017 is filed by Rozina and her son
against Abdul Kadir challenging the very same order for
::: Uploaded on - 15/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 16/07/2017 00:21:56 :::
revn.82.17&97.16 3
enhancement.
4. I heard Shri J.D.Bastian,advocate for Abdul Kadir S/o
Abdul Khaliq and Shri Rohit Masurkar,advocate for Rozina Tabassum
and another.
5. The impugned order shows that by way of interim
arrangement only the learned Judge of the Family Court has passed
the order to see that the wife and minor child are not on street. Final
adjudication in respect of entitlement or otherwise is not at all
decided. Proceedings are still pending. Both these learned counsel
agreed that if the learned Family Court is directed to decide petition
no.E-285/2015 within a stipulated period their purpose will be
served. In that view of their submissions I pass the following order.
ORDER
I) The husband-Abdul Kadir S/o Abdul Khaliq shall continue
to pay maintenance amount as directed by the learned
Judge of the Family Court (No.4),Nagpur dated
30/3/2016 to the wife and his son till disposal of the
main proceeding.
II) The learned counsel Shri J.D.Bastian submits that within
a period of six months he will deposit the arrears of
maintenance before learned Family Court.
III) The learned Family Court is directed to dispose of the
main petition i.e. E-285/2015 within a period of six
months from the next date of the appearance which is
already fixed by the learned Family Court.
IV) With this, both the revisions are disposed of.
Rule stands discharged ,with no order as to costs.
JUDGE
kitey
