JUDGMENT - BHOSALE D.B., J.:---The appellants have challenged the order dated 7th February, 2002 passed by the Family Court, Pune, below Exhibit "1" in Petition No. PC-76/2000. The Family Court by the aforesaid order has returned the said petition filed by the appellants, who are wife and daughter of the respondent, for its presentation in proper Court holding that it has no jurisdiction to entertain the same.

2. Appellant No. 1 married to the respondent on 27th December, 1991. The marriage was solemnized under the provisions of the Special Marriage Act, at Pune. Appellant No. 2 is a daughter of appellant No. 1 from her first husband. Admittedly, the marriage of appellant No. 1 with the respondent is her second marriage. After marriage appellant No. 1 had gone to Ahmedabad and started residing with the respondent in the matrimonial house. After marriage the respondent adopted appellant No. 2 at Pune and she also started residing at Ahmedabad with appellant No. 1 and the respondent. Initially, for few months they led very happy married life and as usual the differences started between them which compelled the appellants to leave matrimonial house. It is the case of the appellants that in view of the strange behaviour of the respondent they were compelled to stay in the rented premises for monthly rent of Rs. 2400/-, at Memnagar area of Ahmedabad where they resided for two years separately from the respondent. In April 2000, the appellants came to Pune and since then they have been staying at Pune with the father of appellant No. 1. The appellants, therefore, have filed the aforesaid petition under sections 18 and 20 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act claiming maintenance at the rate of Rs. 4,000/- per month from 8th April, 1998 till the date of filing of the petition for appellant No. 1 and Rs. 2,000/-, for appellant No. 2. They have also claimed future maintenance at the same rate every month permanently. It appears that initially the said petition was filed only under the provisions of sections 18 and 20 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act and in view thereof the appellants filed application Exhibit "27" on 13th October, 2001 seeking amendment to the petition, to insert in the petition alongwith sections 18 and 20 of Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, section 26 of the Special Marriage Act. The Family Court has not passed any orders on the said application till the impugned order was passed on 7th February, 2002.

3. The respondent-husband filed application Exhibit "29" on 1st December, 2001 and prayed for framing of a preliminary issue of jurisdiction and maintainability of the proceedings. The application filed by the respondent-husband was opposed by the appellants by filing her say contending that the objection to the jurisdiction of the Family Court at Pune had not been taken at the first instance, namely in the written statement and, therefore, the Family Court on 3rd March, 2001 while framing issues did not frame issue regarding jurisdiction of the Family Court at Pune and in view thereof, it is not open to raise such objection. The appellants have further contended in their reply to Exhibit "29" filed by the respondent-husband that they are presently residing at Pune and hence the Family Court at Pune has jurisdiction to entertain and try this petition. It is in this backdrop of the case the impugned order dated 7th February, 2002 came to be passed by the Family Court, Pune by which the said petition has been returned to the appellants for its presentation in proper Court.

4. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties. Perused the impugned order and the documents annexed to the appeal. The Family Court seems to have relied upon section 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in the absence of the provision in the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act regarding the jurisdiction of the Court to which the application for maintenance is to be presented, for returning the petition for its presentation in proper Cour

Click Here to Read the rest of this document