1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1272 OF 2009 Savita Sudhir Gaikwad ........ Petitioner versus Sudhir Kevalram Gaikwad ........Respondent. Mr. Girish Agarwal adv. for the Petitioner Ms Pallavi Dabholkar with Mr. Sujit Shinde adv. for the Respondent. CORAM: A. P DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 19th November, 2009. P. C.: 1. The respondent has instituted a Marriage Petition seeking decree of restitution of conjugal rights against the present petitioner. The petition came to be dismissed for non prosecution on account of absence of the respondent. Subsequent thereto the respondent moved an application for restoration of the petition, on the ground that he is gainfully employed and is residing at Dubai for his employment. He contended that as the employer did not sanction leave on the relevant date, the respondent could not attend the court. It was suggested in the cross examination of the respondent that from 13-10-2005 to 16-1-2006 he was in India which suggestion has been denied by the respondent. It appears to 2 be the case of the present petitioner that though the respondent was in India and was in a position to attend the court, he remained absent. By order dated 6-10-2009 this court has directed the respondent to produce the passport with a view to ascertain as to whether during the relevant period the respondent was in India or was stationed at Dubai. The pass port is produced by the learned counsel for the respondent and the same is perused by the counsel for the petitioner. There is no iota of doubt from the endorsements made in the passport that the respondent at the relevant time was stationed at Dubai. This position is admitted to be correct by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Hence the order of restoration of the Marriage Petition cannot be faulted. There being no merit in the petition, the same is dismissed. (A. P. Deshpande, J.)