HARSHA INDUKUMAR BHOJANI Vs. INDUKUMAR RATILAL BHOJANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS the facts in each of the above Family Court appeals is the same, it would be convenient to deal with them by a common judgment. For convenience we shall refer to the wife as the Appellant and the husband as the Respondent. The Appellant had filed a Petition being petition No. B-37 of 1994 for a declaration that the premises being a flat is the matrimonial home of the parties, for an injunction restraining the Respondent from selling, transferring or creating any third part? rights in respect of the same and for an injunction restraining the Respondent from dispossessing her for the said premises. The Appellant also sought an injunction restraining the Respondent from operating a bank account, removing anything from a bank locker and from transferring the shares, fixed deposits and other movables in favour of any persons. Petition No. C-14 of 1995 was filed by the Appellant under Section 18 (i) (3)and (20) of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, seeking maintenance for herself and her sea Prashantraj. Petition No. A-165 of 1996 was filed by the respondent under Section 13 (i) (i-a) of the Hindu marriage Act, 1955, seeking a decree of divorce. The above Appeal Nos. 34, 35 and 37 of 2002 = filed by the Appellant wife against the decision of the family court in the above Petition Nos. B-3? of 1994. C-14 of 1995 and A-165 of 1996 respectively.

(2.) THE Family Court dismissed the Appellant s Petitions and allowed the Respondent's Petition for divorce. the marriage between the parties was dissolved. The respondent was directed to pay the Appellant maintenance at the rate of Rs. 2000/- per month with effect from the date of the order. In addition thereto the Respondent was also directed to pay to the Appellant a sum of rs. 5,00,000/- to enable her to make provision for a separate residence for herself. The Respondent was directed to deposit the said amount of Rs. 5,00,000/ -. The Appellant was granted liberty to receive the said amount after she removed herself from the Respondent s residence. An ad-interim injunction granted earlier restraining the Respondent from dispossessing her from the flat was directed to be continued for a period of one month from the date of the Respondent depositing rs. 5,00,000/- in Court. The aforesaid Family Court appeals arise from a common judgment of the Family court.

(3.) WE do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment except to a limited extent regarding the mode and quantum of the maintenance granted by the family Court.