1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 401 OF 2007 CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 401 OF 2007 CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 401 OF 2007 Mr. Divyaksh Kapur ... Petitioner Vs. Mrs. Priyanka Kapur ... Respondent Mr.M.N.Havnur, Advocate, for Mrs. Chitra Phadke,Advocate for the appellant Ms. Seema Sarnaik, Advocate, for the respondent. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE: 17th January,2008. DATE: 17th January,2008. DATE: 17th January,2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard learned Counsel for both the sides. 2. The respondent filed Petition No.A-149 of 2004 before the Family Court against her husband for divorce. In that petition, on an application filed by the husband seeking access to the minor daughter Anushka. Order was passed by the Family Court on 10.11.2006 permiting the husband and his parents to have access to the child on 2 every 4th Saturday and Sunday. That order was challenged in Writ Petition No.8364 of 2006 and the said Writ Petition was disposed of by this Court by an order dated 20.12.2006 with consent of the parties. As per the said order of the High Court, the respondent and his prevents were permitted to have access to the child on 4th Saturday & Sunday every month. The petitiioner-wife was to reach the child in the company of the parents of the respondent at 11 a.m. on Saturday and take back the child at 7 p.m. on Saturday. Whereas on Sunday she was to take back the child at 5 p.m. Certain other directiions were also given about trial of the said petition. According to the petitioner, he is presently in USA and as per the directions given by this Court on 20.12.2006, the respondent was to give access to the parents on every 4th Saturday and Sunday, but that order has not been complied with for a long time. In view of this, he made an application before the trial Court to stay the proceedings. That application was rejected. Thereafter, the petitioner has come to this Court by filing Contempt Petition against the respondent. 3. This matter was heard on a number of dates to find out whether there could be an amicable settlement to avoid any difficulties which are being faced by the parents of the petitiioner. It may be noted that 3 according to the respondent, she has already shifted to Dubai and has taken some job there in May, 2007 and, therefore, since May, 2007, she has not been able to comply with the directions given by this Court in respect of the access to the child. This Court had asked the learned Counsel for the respondent to make a statement when at the earliest she would be in a position to comply with the directions. However, the learned Counsel for the respondent makes a statement that the respondent, in view of her job in Dubai, is not willing to come to India nor she is in a position to comply with the directions given by this Court. Today, she makes a statement that the respondent may come to India only during July, 2008 which is the summer vacation for the child because the child is also admitted in some school in K.G. in that country. 4. Admittedly, the respondent did not inform the Family Court or this Court before leaving the country along with the child to settle in Dubai. It is also material to note that she also never moved any application before this court for modificatin of the order dated 20.12.2006. It is material to note that the Family Court had passed an order granting maintenance to the wife at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per month and at the rate of Rs.5,000/- per month to the child. That amount 4 of maintenance has been regularly deposited with the Family Court. From this, it appears that while the respondent has obtained the order of maintenance for herself and her child and that order is being complied with by the husband, she herself has not obeyed the order passed by this Court in respect of granting access of the child to the parents. From the conduct of the respondent-wife, it is clear that she has wilfully flouted the orders of the Court and she has also no desire to comply with the same. It amounts to contempt of court. However, at present, she is not within the territorial jurisdictin of the Family Court or this Court and she is presently living in a foreign country. It is not that this Court is helpless in securing presence of herself and the child, because they are Indian citizens and must have gone to Dubai on Indian Passport, but I do not intend to take any harsh action which may jeopardise her career. In my considered opinion, she cannot get benefits of the orders passed by the Court in her favour while she is not willing to comply with the order obliging her to do certain things. Therefore, it will be in the interest of justice that the proceedings in Marriage Petition filed by her as well as the order granting maintenance to her should be stayed till the time she is not willing to comply with the directiions of this Court passed on 20.12.2006. 5 5. Taking into consideratioon the circmstances and the coduct of the respondent-wife, the Contempt Petition stands disposed of with the following directions :- (i) Further proceedings in Petitiion No.A-149/2004 pending before the Family Court, Pune, shall remain stayed and the order passed by the Family Court granting maintenance to the wife shall also remain stayed till she appears before the Family Court along with the child and complies with the directions given by this Court on 20.12.2006. (ii) The maintenance amount in respect of the Petitioner-wife which is deposited by the husband before the Family Court so far, shall not be allowed to be withdrawn by her. (iii) As far as the order for payment of maintenance to the child is concerned, that order shall remain intact. (iv) If the Petitioner-Wife does not appear before the Family Court till the end of July, 2008, her petition for divorce shall stand 6 dismissed. (J.H.BHATIA,J.) (J.H.BHATIA,J.) (J.H.BHATIA,J.)