A.R. Joshi, J.

1. Both the appeals are preferred by the appellant-husband challenging the judgment and order passed on 30.12.2004 by the learned Judge of Family Court No.4, Mumbai at Bandra. The said impugned judgment and order was passed as a common judgment disposing off two petitions filed by the present respondent-wife. Hereinafter for the sake of clarity, present appellant is referred to as husband and present respondent is referred to as wife.

2. Respondent-wife had preferred Petition No.B63/ 2001 asking for declaration that she is entitled to possessory right over her matrimonial home situated at Flat No.15, 5th floor, Sawant Bhavan, 18/A, 76, Gokuldas Pasta Road, Dadar (E), Mumbai – 400 014. She also prayed for permanent injunction restraining appellant-husband from obstructing and/or preventing her entry in the said matrimonial home / flat and also prayed for permanent injunction restraining her forcible dispossession from the said flat. Respondent-wife also filed another Petition No.C224/ 2002 asking for maintenance to herself under Section 18 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act. 1956. Both the said Petitions were respectively filed on 22.10.2001 and 17.9.2002 and were taken before the same Family Court and were disposed of by a common judgment and order, which is impugned in present appeals. This being the factual position and as the evidence of both the parties was recorded in common in both the petitions, both the present appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

3. Heard rival submissions at length on earlier dates. Perused the record and proceedings and also the substantive evidence of witnesses examined by rival parties. Also perused various documents including photographs produced on record before the trial Court.

4. Prior to discussing the main thrust of arguments advanced on behalf of appellant-husband, certain background of the matter, as to relations interse between the parties, is required to be narrated in order to have proper perspective of the case and in order to ascertain the merits of the present appeals. According to the case of respondent-wife, the marriage between the parties took place on 22.12.2000 according to Hindu Vedic rites at the residential flat situated on the 5th floor of the building situated at Gokuldas Pasta Road, Dadar (East), Mumbai. It was an arranged marriage between them and attended by about seven relatives from husband side and six relatives from the wife side. No marriage invitation cards were printed and no big ceremony was performed by calling various persons and friends etc. as it was the second marriage of respondent-wife and apparently third marriage of appellant-husband. At this juncture, it must be mentioned that admittedly it was the second marriage of respondent-wife and as per the record and as accepted by the husband, it was his second marriage and there was no material brought on record by respondent-wife that it was his third marriage. But the fact remains that the present appellant-husband was widower as his first wife had apparently committed suicide and the present respondent-wife was a divorcee as she had taken divorce from her husband from first marriage. Again at this juncture, it must be mentioned that the said dissolution of the first marriage of respondent-wife has been vehemently denied by the present appellant-husband and in fact it is one of his main defences that her first marriage is still in existence and as such there was nothing like she being his legally wedded wife though claimed by her in her both the petitions before the Family Court.

5. Prior to the marriage of respondent-wife, her maiden name was Miss. Sujata Namdeo Ankam. Her first marriage was with one Ravindra Chitta. It was performed on 19.5.1989 and there was customary divorce by execution of divorce deed on 11.7.1993.

6. According to respondent-wife, after her marriage with the present appellant-husband on 22.12.2000 both started residing toget