1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 686 OF 2010 Smt. Kamal Laxman Vichare. ....Petitioner vs Shri Laxman Keshavrao Vichare. ....Respondent Mr. J.M. Puranik for the Petitioner. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 22ND FEBRUARY, 2010. P.C. :- 1. The Petitioner had filed M.J. Petition No.A/566 of 2000 for restitution of conjugal rights. The Respondent thereafter filed M.J. Petition No.222 of 2001, seeking a divorce, inter alia, on the ground of cruelty and desertion. The Petitioner had taken out an application for stay of the Respondent’s Petition which became infructuous in view of the Petitioner’s Petition having been decreed. The Petitioner, therefore, took out an application for determination of a preliminary issue. The Petitioner contended that the issue raised in the present Petition stands 2 concluded by virtue of the decision in the Petitioner’s Petition viz. M.J. Petition No.A/566 of 2000. The trial Court held that the ground of cruelty is not hit by the principles of res judicata as the same were not in issue in the Petitioner’s earlier petition. 2. I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order at this stage. The Petitioner can always challenge the order from the final decree, if necessary. The Petitioner has not produced the Respondent’s Petition. Prima facie, at least, if the allegations of cruelty pertain to the period after the Petitioner instituted M.J. Petition No.A/566 of 2000, they can always be raised in the Petitioner’s Petition which was filed subsequent thereto. In these circumstances, there would be no question of any inconsistent decrees especially if the Respondent succeeds on the ground of cruelty, subsequent to the Petitioner’s Petition for restitution of conjugal rights. 3. All the contentions between the parties are kept open. 4. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. 3