appr60.19.odt

1/2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CRI.APPLN. (APPR) NO. 60 OF 2019

IN

CRI.REVN.APPLN. NO. 37 OF 2019

Ashok Rambhau Kathe

-Vs.-

Meera Ashokrao Kathe and another

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Office notes, Office Memoranda of

Coram, appearances, Court's orders

Court's or Judge's Orders.

or directions and Registrar's orders.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr.A.A.Dhawas, Advocate for the applicant.

Mr.V.A.Kothale, Advocate for the non-applicants.

CORAM : MANISH PITALE, J.

DATE : 14.06.2019.

This revision application was admitted by an

order of this Court on 08/02/2019 and it was

directed to be put up for final hearing.

2.

Today when the application is called out for

hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the

applicant has pressed prayer for stay of the

impugned judgment and order contending that the

Family Court has erred in granting relief of grant of

maintenance amount of Rs.10,000/- per month to

respondent No.2 for the period 27/02/2013 till she

attained the majority on 21/09/2016, because there

was no analysis of the source of income of the

applicant for determination of the quantum of

maintenance.

3.

It is contended that the applicant is a poor

KHUNTE

appr60.19.odt

2/2

agriculturist and that therefore, he is unable to pay

the quantum of maintenance granted by the Family

Court to respondent No.2.

4.

A perusal of the impugned judgment and

order shows that there is detailed discussion on the

land holdings in the name of the applicant,

indicating that he cannot be categorized as a poor

agriculturist, as claimed by him. Apart from this

fact, it has also come on record that the applicant

has married a second time and that he has an issue

from the said marriage as well. Taking into

consideration the aforesaid circumstances, the

prayer for stay made on behalf of the applicant

cannot be granted unconditionally.

5.

In view of the above, the effect and operation

of the impugned judgment and order shall remain

stayed, subject to the applicant making payment of

an amount of Rs.2,20,000/- to respondent No.2

within a period of six weeks from today. It is made

clear that if the payment of the said amount is not

made within the said period, the stay granted by

this Court shall stand vacated.

6.

List for further consideration on 01/08/2019.

7.

Since the revision application has been

admitted, call for R.& P.

JUDGE

KHUNTE