Bombay High Court
Pravin S/O Mangesh Dange And ... vs Smt. Sanjyot W/O Pravin Dange on 27 June, 2017
Bench: V.M. Deshpande
revn.no.141.2016 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 141 of 2016
1. Shri Pravin S/o Mangesh Dange,
Aged about 43 years,Occ-Nil,
2. Shri Mangeshrao Dange,
Aged about 80 years,Occ-Retired,
3. Kusum W/o Mangeshrao Dange,
Aged about 69 years,Occ-Nil,
4. Vinod S/o Mangeshrao Dange,
Aged about 53 years,Occ-Nil,
5. Jayant S/o Mangeshrao Dange,
Aged about 51 years, Occ-Nil,
Applicant nos. 1 to 5 are r/o
Plot No.168,Shivaji nagar,
Nagpur-440010.
6. Mrs. Smita W/o Gajananrao Patil,
Aged about 49 years,Occ-Nil,
R/o Ground Floor Parijat Apartment,
Laxminagar,Nagpur. ..... APPLICANTS
...V E R S U S...
Smt.Sanjot W/o Pravin Dange,
Aged about 43 years,Occ-Private,
R/o-C/o Suresh H.Admane,Plot no.332,
Near Nutan Bharat School,
Abhyankar nagar, Nagpur-440010. ...NON-APPLICANT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri Shrirang Bhongade, Advocate for the applicants.
Mrs. Renuka Sirpurkar, Advocate for non-applicant
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
::: Uploaded on - 29/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 30/06/2017 00:46:52 :::
revn.no.141.2016 2
CORAM:- V. M. DESHPANDE, J.
DATED :- JUNE 27,2017
ORAL JUDGMENT
Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally
by consent of learned counsel for the parties.
By the present revision the applicants are challenging
the judgment and order passed by learned Additional Sessions
Judge,Nagpur in Criminal Appeal No.283/2015, dated
08/07/2016 and also the order passed by the learned
J.M.F.C.Nagpur, dated 11/09/2015 in Misc.Criminal Case
No.3203/2014 by which learned Magistrate allowed the
application filed on behalf of the non-applicant for interim
maintenance. By the order dated 11/9/2015, learned J.M.F.C.
Special Court(DV Act),Nagpur partly allowed the application filed
on behalf of the non-applicant and directed the present applicant
no.1 to pay an amount of Rs. 8,000/- per month by way of interim
maintenance from the date of filing of application for
maintenance. Dissatisfied with the said order, the present
applicants who are the husband and inlaws of the non-applicant
preferred an appeal under Section 29 of the Protection of Women
from Domestic Violence Act,2005. The said appeal was registered
as Appeal No.283/2015. learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Nagpur dismissed the said appeal on 08/7/2016. Hence, this
revision.
2. learned counsel Shri Bhongade for applicants
strenuously urged before this Court that the order passed by the
both the Courts below are liable to be set aside. He also submitted
that the interim maintenance granted in favour of non-applicant is
on higher side and therefore interference of this Court at this
stage is required. Per contra, Smt.Sirpurkar, learned counsel for
non-applicant pointed out that orders impugned are just and
proper. She also submitted that it is nothing but interim
arrangement made by the Courts below to see that the wife is not
destituted.
3. Admittedly, the main proceedings under Section 12 of
D.V.Act are still pending therefore, this Court is not embarking
upon detail enquiry, in respect of statements of the assertion
made in the application or reply filed on behalf of the present
applicants, same will cause prejudice to the parties while
deciding the main application. Suffice to say, one of the prayers in
the said main application is for grant of maintenance at the rate of
Rs. 15,000/- per month.
4. Pending the main application an application under
Section 23 of the D.V.Act was moved by the non-applicant/wife
for grant of interim maintenance. It is the submission of learned
counsel for the applicants that wife-non-applicant is running
coaching classes and in fact the documents filed on record which
he has obtained under the Right to Information Act, in respect of
her income from the Income Tax Department shows that she earns
more than Rs. 1,00,000/- per year. Dr.Smt.Sirpurkar,learned
counsel for non-applicant submitted that in fact learned appellate
Court as well as learned trial Court below have considered the said
aspect and has also noted that the non-applicant-wife is suffering
from intestine disease and therefore she is unable to conduct
coaching classes and therefore she is not having any means to
survive.
5. The documents which are produced on record in so far
as from the Income Tax Department it was during the period 2010
to 2014. learned Appellate Court has considered the case of the
non-applicant-wife in the year 2016. There is nothing available on
record i.e. filed on record by the present applicants to show that in
the year 2016 also the wife is running coaching classes. In absence
of that material I see no reason to disturb the prima facie finding
recorded by both the Courts below that the wife -non-applicant
suffers from intestine disease and therefore she is unable to run
coaching classes.
6. The parties are yet to enter into witness box to prove
their respective case. Presently by passing the order of
maintenance the Court has made interim arrangement to see that
the wife-non-applicant does not suffer any financial hardship to
lead her life. It is always open for the Court to deduce the
inference in respect of the income of both the parties to reach to a
interim arrangement . The admissibility of the documents filed on
record by both the parties will of course be considered by the
Court while deciding the main application. The Courts below have
found that the applicants are having sufficient means.
Dr.Smt.Sirpurkar, learned counsel for non-applicant submitted
that list of various businesses conducted by the applicants is filed
on record and the said submission is not countered by the learned
counsel for applicants. In view of the matter, in my view the
interim arrangement of Rs. 8,000/- per month is just and proper
and looking to the present scenario of high rising prices it cannot
be said that it is excessive one. Hence, the revision is dismissed.
7. However, it is to be seen that matter is pending before
learned Magistrate since September-2014. Both the learned
counsel submitted that they will cooperate with the learned
Magistrate to decide the application expeditiously. Looking to the
facts since the application is pending since 2014 and the parties
have completed their pleadings, the case is fixed for evidence. I
direct the learned 24th Joint Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And J.M.F.C.
(Special D.V.Court),Nagpur to decide the Misc.Criminal Case
No.3203/2014 pending on his file as expeditiously as possible and
not later than one year from the date of receipt of this order.
Rule is discharged with no order as to costs.
JUDGE
kitey
