SMT. DEVIKA JOSHI W/O DEEPAK JOSHI, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, C/O PT. CHHAGAN SHARMA, BIRJHAPUR (BESIDE SHANI TEMPLE) TAHSIL DHAMDHA, DIST. Vs. SHRI DEEPAK JOSHI S/O SHRI MANOHAR LAL JOSHI, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/O OPPOSITE SHANI TEMPLE, SHANIPET JALGAON, TAHSIL & DIST. JALGAON (KHANDESH) MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present is an appeal under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 assailing the legality and validity of the order passed by the Family Court directing the appellant/wife to amend the application to make it a plaint; value the stridhan item for the purpose of pecuniary jurisdiction and Court fee, thereafter pay the requisite Court fee in terms of Section 7 of the Court Fees Act, 1870.

(2.) The facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellant preferred an application before the Family Court under Section 7 Explanation (c) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, for return of stridhan properties on averment that the parties were married according to Hindu law on 15.07.2013 at village Birjhapur, District-Durg, however, on account of dispute between the parties, she had to prefer an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. for grant of maintenance. The respondent/non-applicant is not returning the stridhan properties as detailed in Para-6 of the application, therefore, the respondent/non-applicant be directed to return the properties.

(3.) The application was presented on 21.12.2015, however, it could not be taken up by the Court as the Presiding Officer was on leave. It was posted for hearing on 07.01.2016 in the absence of the appellant. The Family Court proceeded to examine the record along with report of the reader and concluded on the strength of the law laid down by this Court in the matter of Neelkanth Jaiswal v. Manjulata Jaiswal, 2011 D.M.C. 651 : AIR 2011 CHH 6 that the appellant is required to amend the petition to make it a plaint and thereafter value the items for the purposes of pecuniary jurisdiction, Court fees and pay requisite ad valorem Court fee.