- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7800 OF 2007 Mrs. Manisha S. Mane Petitioner Vs. Mr. Sanjay S. Mane Respondent Mr. P. J. Pawar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K. M. Sanghani i/b. Sanjay S. Gavde, Advocate for the respondent. CORAM : S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : FEBRUARY 18, 2008 PC . Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. Perused the impugned order. 2. The grievance is that the petitioner wife has been denied interim maintenance to herself, although the same has been granted in so far as the minor son is concerned. 3. It is contended that in the petition itself the husband has stated that the petitioner wife is a house-wife. Yet, while the application for interim Maintainence was being argued, the learned - 2 - advocate produced some documents and contended that the petitioner/wife is earning Rs.4,000/-. Mr. Pawar appearing for the petitioner submits that no document was produced but an oral submission was made which has been erroneously believed. 4. In my view, the reasoning in paragraph 8 of the order proceeds on the basis that the petitioner wife is employed and is earning some amount. That finding is rendered without referring to any document, but on the basis of a statement made across the bar. In such view of the matter, while maintaining the order, it would be in the interest of justice if the petitioner wife is granted liberty to apply for interim maintenance for herself afresh and if such an application is made, the same be considered without being influenced by the impugned order. The petition is disposed of with this liberty. Sd/- [ S.C. DHARMADHIKARI J.]