1 WP.6929/2010 mnm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6929 OF 2010 Rishi Omprakash Didwania ...Petitioner Vs. Vijayshree Rishi Didwania ...Respondent Mr. Vivek Kantawala with Ms. Martha Butala and Ms. Sneha Nanandkar i/b. M/s. Vivek Kantawala & Co., for Petitioner CORAM : SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J. DATED : 28TH OCTOBER, 2010 P.C. : 1. The notice has been issued upon the Respondent initially through courier and thereafter by registered post at her last known address. That was the address mentioned by the Respondent in her cross examination in the criminal prosecution in the Magistrate’s Court under Section 498 A of the I.P.C. The Petitioner has produced the packets containing the notices issued and the papers and proceedings sent to the Respondent. The Respondent has failed to appear. 2. It is the Petitioner’s case that interim maintenance was 2 WP.6929/2010 determined by the learned Judge of the Family Court, Mumbai upon the premise that the Respondent did not work and hence had no income. That premise was correct and accepted from the statement of the Respondent herein. Thereafter a review petition has been filed which has been rejected. Thereafter in the cross examination of the Respondent in the aforesaid proceeding certain material difference in her position has come to be noticed. The Petitioner would be entitled to apply to the Family Court for review of the order of interim maintenance based upon fresh evidence led by the Respondent herself. 3. Under these circumstances no relief need be granted in the Writ Petition because the impugned orders cannot be challenged. 4. The Petitioner shall take out application in accordance with law for change in the maintenance order as required on merits upon considering the fresh evidence that is brought to the notice of the Petitioner. 5. If such an application is made, the learned Family Court Judge would decide it on merits. 6. The Writ Petition is disposed off accordingly. (SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J.)