1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.602 OF 2009 Hema P. Tulsian. ..Petitioner. V/s. Piyush Tulsian. ..Respondent. Mr.R.D.Lalwani with Ms. S.I.Jaykar Lalwani for petitioner. Mr.A.M.Sarogi for Respondent. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J DATE : MARCH 25, 2009. DATE : MARCH 25, 2009. DATE : MARCH 25, 2009. P.C. : P.C. : P.C. : 1. Heard Counsel for the parties. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent. Mr.Sarogi waives notice for Respondent. 3. As short question is involved, Petition is taken up for final hearing forthwith by consent. 4. The limited controversy in the present Petition is with regard to the request made by the Petitioner to the lower Court for direction against the Respondent/husband to produce certain documents which according to the Petitioner may be useful and 2 relevant for deciding the issue regarding interim maintenance during the pendency of the proceedings. The Petitioner requested for production of following documents. "(i) Complete income tax returns alongwith all the enclosures for self, HUF, Prompt Toys Pvt.Ltd., Polo Tradex Pvt.Ltd. and all other individual/joint business concerns of the Respondent, for past five years. (ii) Statements of all the individual/joint bank accounts of the Respondent and his business concerns, including demat accounts for past three years. (iii) Details and documents of all the investments held by the Respondent individually, jointly, in the name of his business concerns during past three years. (iv) Statements of all the credit cards held by the Respondent in his name, for past three years. (v) Documents pertaining to all the immovable/movable properties owned by the Respondent individually, jointly and /or in the name of his business concerns. (vi) Latest leave and license agreement in respect of the premises at Raj Arcade Tower, Kandivali, Mumbai. (vii) Attested copy of the Respondent’s passport for the period of past three years. (viii) Documents pertaining to all the vehicles owned/used by the Respondent. (ix) Copy of Respondent’s PPF account passbook. (x) Copies of all the insurance /medi-claim policies held by the Respondent." 3 5. The Respondent in response to the said requisition produced only document (at page 33 of the paper book) which is described as income tax department acknowledgement. The stand of the Respondent is that production of this document is sufficient compliance of item-1 referred to above. It is not possible to countenance this submission. The title of the document at page 33 itself answers the point in issue. In that, the document is described as income tax department acknowledgement. Obviously, it is not an income tax return of the Respondent as such. It is a different matter that the document gives figures of heads described thereunder but that cannot be said to be income tax returns to be presented to the authorities. 6. Counsel for the Respondent now wants to rely on page 34. Without entering into any further controversy, the appropriate course, in my opinion, to meet the ends of justice, is to direct the Respondent to produce complete income tax returns as was submitted to the income tax authority through his Chartered Accountant. The said income tax return for past five years to be certified by the Chartered Accountant of the Respondent to be true and complete 4 copies of the original income tax return for the relevant period. I am inclined to issue this direction to the Respondent as the said documents would be relevant to ascertain the real income of the Respondent for fixing interim maintenance to be paid to the Petitioner wife. For determination of that issue, even the Respondent is obliged to assist the Court in ascertaining his real income and cannot do so without relying on his income tax returns filed by him for the relevant period-which is official document. 7. If the complete income tax returns for the past five years are furnished by the Respondent to the Petitioner, the Items at Sr.No.2,3, 5, 6, 9 and 10 may not be insisted upon by the Petitioner; unless the Petitioner is able to convince the lower Court that inspite of production of income tax returns for the relevant period the production of concerned documents is equally imperative as it does not form part of the income tax return or stands explained by the entries in the income tax return as such. 8. Needless to observe that the request of production of any further document made by the 5 Petitioner will have to be considered in the context of deciding the issue of interim maintenance at this stage. During the trial however, if the Petitioner insists for production of the very same documents to establish some other relevant fact the trial Court will have to consider that request on its own merit. 9. The respondent who is present in the Court assures through the Counsel to furnish the complete income tax return for the past five years alongwith certificate of the Chartered Accountant within three weeks from today. Needless to observe that non-compliance of this direction may invite consequences of striking off the defence of the Respondent in the proceedings pending before the lower Court. 10. Petition disposed of on the above terms. (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J)