1 wp9578-10.sxw pps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPLICATION JURISDICTION Writ Petition No. 9578 of 2010 Ms.Desiree Gary Sewel .. Petitioner v/s. Mr.Gary Herbet Sewel ..Respondent Mr.Nikhil Karnawat for the petitioner Mr.Abhijit Sarware for the respondent CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATED : 23rd March, 2011 P.C. : 1. Heard learned Counsels on both sides. 2. Rule, made returnable forthwith. 3. Learned Counsel Mr. Sarwate appearing on behalf of the respondent waives service. Petition is taken up for final hearing. 4. The respondent herein has filed divorce petition in the Family Court being P.A.No.795 of 2009. The petitioner herein has filed written 2 wp9578-10.sxw statement. Both the parties are represented by Advocates. The Court is about to frame the issues. Naturally, after the framing of issues, parties will lead the respective evidence. 5. I am told across the bar that the procedure provided in the Family Court Act as regards counseling was not complied with. Hence an application came to be filed by the petitioner herein directing the respondent herein to remain present before the Court and submit for counselling. That application has been rejected by the learned Judge of the Family Court by order dated 16.10.2010. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. After hearing learned Counsels on both sides, it is clear that the matter has crossed the stage of counseling and it is in the process of hearing. In my view, if this is the stage at which the matter is pending, there is no need to take the matter back and call upon the respondent to submit himself for Counseling. The very fact that the written statement has been filed by the present petitioner in the Family Court clearly goes to show that the petitioner is not inclined to think otherwise and that the petitioner is in a mood to oppose the grant of the petition. Hence the stage of counseling is crossed. 3 wp9578-10.sxw 6. If one peruses the provisions of the Family Court Act, it certainly indicates that after the proceedings are served upon the adversory, the parties have to go for counseling and try to arrive at amicable solution. The person against whom the proceedings are filed will get a chance to adopt appropriate defence and file written statement. In the present case, written statement having been filed and issues are about to be framed, there is no need of going in for counseling and therefore there is no need to interfere in the Order dated 16.10.2010. To that extent the petition is rejected. 7. It is clarified that this order is passed taking into consideration peculiar circumstances of this case. This order cannot be cited as a precedent. The learned Judge of the Family Court shall hear and dispose of main proceedings on merits and shall not get influenced by whatever is stated in this order. [R.Y.GANOO, J.]