1 Amk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1064 OF 2010 Sachina Sachin Pendurkar .. Petitioner Vs. Sachin Vijay Pendurkar .. Respondent Mr. H. S. Anand i/b Ms. Sarita Donde for the Petitioner. Mr. Sachin V. Pendurkar present in person. CORAM : MRS. R. S. DALVI, J. DATE : 11th March, 2010. P.C. 1. This writ petition is for a direction for payment of outstanding maintenance to the petitioner, for committing the respondent to civil prison and for staying the petition filed by the petitioner herself in the Family Court. The petitioner has not impugned any order of the Family Court. However, it was argued that the defence of the respondent has been struck off. Thereafter, the Court has placed the petition for the cross-examination of the petitioner. Mr. Anand on behalf of the petitioner argued that no cross-examination can take place because the respondent’s defence is struck off. 2. It has been held in the case of Sheshrao Ingole Vs. Shilpa Ingole (2005(1) Mh.L.J. 188), that even if the defence is struck off, the cross-examination of the petitioner has to be done to ascertain whether the 2 petitioner would be entitled to any relief. Hence, the cross- examination shall have to proceed. The orders of the learned Principal Judge of the Family Court shown in the roznamas produced by the petitioner are correct. 3. The Writ Court cannot direct maintenance amount to be paid. The Writ Court also cannot commit the respondent to civil prison. The petitioner shall be entitled to take recourse to such remedies as are open to her for execution of the order of interim maintenance already passed. The writ petition is dismissed. 4. The husband, who is present in Court, is explained this order and directed to appear before the Family Court to cross-examine the petitioner/wife on the next date of hearing. (R. S. DALVI, J.)