Jamna Datwani vs Janak Datwani
2020 Latest Caselaw 2712 Del

                                      $~14

                                      * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                      %                                     Judgment delivered on: 23.09.2020

                                      +      CONT.CAS(C) 263/2020
                                             JAMNA DATWANI                                      ..... Petitioner

                                                                   versus

                                             JANAK DATWANI                                      ..... Respondent

                                      Advocates who appeared in this case:
                                      For the Petitioner: Mr. Deepak Khosla, Advocate.



                                      For the Respondent:   Mr. Abhimanyu Mahajan with Ms. Anubha Goel,
                                                            Ms. Tanisha Bawa and Mr. Mayank Joshi, Advocates.

                                      CORAM:-
                                      HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

                                                                      JUDGMENT

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

CONT.CAS(C) 263/2020 &CM APPL.11489/2020 (for seeking time)

1. The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.

2. Petitioner had filed the subject petition seeking initiation of proceedings against the respondent for breach of order dated

Digitally Signed By:KUNAL MAGGU Signing Date:23.09.2020 18:21:15 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.

02.05.2014 and judgment dated 16.05.2014, whereby, respondent was directed to pay Rs.35,000/- per month to the petitioner.

3. It is an admitted position that the respondent has cleared the entire payments. One of the issues raised by Mr. Deepak Khosla during the pendency of the petition was that several payments during the period from 2014 to 2020 had been received from a Company M/s. Fridace Engineers Pvt. Ltd. and as per the instructions of the petitioner, respondent had no concern with the said Company and as such there was no clarity as to why payments were received from M/s. Fridace Engineers Pvt. Ltd or as to whether the respondent had made the payments in terms of orders of the Court.

4. A certificate of an authorised representative duly supported by a Board Resolution dated 08.09.2020 has been filed by M/s. Fridace Engineers Pvt. Ltd. The certificate is signed by its Director Mr. Ramesh Chand Gupta certifying that payments of Rs.35,000/- were made by the said Company to the petitioner between 2014 till March 2020 and said payments were made on behalf of Mr. Janak Datwani in compliance of order dated 16.05.2014, passed by the Delhi High Court in FAO(OS) 592/2013.

5. Further, it is certified that the said Company has no claim against Mrs. Jamna Datwani for payments made to her and it has also been certified that she is not a debtor in the books of the Company.

Digitally Signed By:KUNAL MAGGU Signing Date:23.09.2020 18:21:15 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.

6. In view of the above, no further orders are called for in the present petition.

7. Petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

8. Copy of the order be uploaded on the High Court website and be also forwarded to learned counsels through email by the Court Master.

SEPTEMBER 23, 2020 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J st

Digitally Signed By:KUNAL MAGGU Signing Date:23.09.2020 18:21:15 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.