IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (LODGING) NO. 61 OF 2008 CONTEMPT PETITION (LODGING) NO. 61 OF 2008 CONTEMPT PETITION (LODGING) NO. 61 OF 2008 IN IN IN SUIT NO. 4800 OF 1995 SUIT NO. 4800 OF 1995 SUIT NO. 4800 OF 1995 Mrs.Hamida wife of Hanif Payak ...Petitioner vs. Hanif Ibrahim Payak & Anr. ...Respondents Mr.Santosh B. Narwade i/b. Mr.M.M. Joshi for the Petitioner. None for the Respondents. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. DATED : SEPTEMBER 4, 2008 DATED : SEPTEMBER 4, 2008 DATED : SEPTEMBER 4, 2008 P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner. 2. It is submitted that the respondent has not paid maintenance to the petitioner though he was directed to pay maintenance by an order of this Court dated 13th March, 1996. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that by the said order, the respondent was directed to pay maintenance to the petitioner at the rate of Rs.5000/- per month. He submitted that he has paid the - 2 - maintenance only after he was convicted by this Court in the contempt proceedings which were taken out against him. He submitted that later on, however, no contempt has been made by the respondent. He submits that therefore, this is a recurring cause of action. The respondent is, therefore, liable to be convicted under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. 4. In my view, it is not possible to accept the submission made by the petitioner. No undertaking was given by the respondent to this Court. The petitioner has a remedy of filing an execution application against the respondent. Hence, the contempt petition is not maintainable and is accordingly disposed of. (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.)