1 WP4824.09.sxw JPP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4824 OF 2009 Mr. Sudhir Suryakant Pawar. ... Petitioner. V/s. Mrs. Archana Sudhir Pawar. ... Respondent. Mr. V.G. Peshave for the Petitioner. Mr. S.S. Hardikar for the Respondent. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. DATED : 24th MARCH 2011. P.C. :- The Respondent herein has filed Petition for divorce under Hindu Marriage Act at Family Court at Pune being PA No. 673 of 2008. In the said Petition the Respondent had filed application for interim maintenance at Exhibit 5. Said application was for maintenance for herself, 2 daughters and one son. The learned Judge of the Family Court has by order dated 12th February 2009 decided the said application and has granted maintenance to the Respondent at the rate of Rs. 3,000/- per month, Rs.4,000/- per month for each of 2 daughters and Rs.2,000/- per month for the minor son. This amount is to be paid with effect from 10th July 2008 till the disposal of the main Petition. The Court is informed that as of today the Petitioner is in arrears. 2 WP4824.09.sxw 2. I have heard learned Counsels on both sides. After some arguments, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, upon instructions from the Petitioner who is present in the Court submitted that according to the Petitioner, after 12th February 2009 there have been substantial changes in the family life of the Petitioner and therefore, the Petitioner is wanting to file an application before the learned Judge of the Family Court to place on record changed circumstances and apply for modification of the order dated 12th February 2009. 3. So far as the merits are concerned, after hearing the learned Counsels on both sides, I am not inclined to interfere on the question of quantum. Now, that the Petitioner wants to place before the Court certain facts and circumstances which according to him amount to change in circumstances after the date of the passing of the order the Petitioner can be permitted to do so. Needless to mention that till such time, order dated 12th February 2009 runs against the Petitioner, same shall be treated as an order for maintenance. 4. In view of the above, following order is passed to dispose of the Petition :- (i) No interference on merits in the impugned order dated 12th February 2009 is called for. If the Petitioner wants to apply for modification of the order dated 12th February 2009 on the ground that 3 WP4824.09.sxw since after the passing of the order dated 12th February 2009, there have been change in circumstances, he is free to do so. Said application shall be attended to by the concerned Court on merits. Till such time, order dated 12th February 2009 runs against the Petitioner, same can be acted upon by the Respondent. There shall be no order as to costs. (R.Y. GANOO, J.)