: 1 : fca-53-00=.doc USJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 53 OF 2000 Suresh Baburao Khandekar .. Appellant v/s. Mrs. Uma Suresh Khandekar & Ors. .. Respondents ......... Ms. Alpa Javeri for the appellant Mr. Abhay Kumar Apte for respondent nos. 1 to 3. ......... CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR & R.Y.GANOO, JJ. DATE : 24th JUNE 2011. P.C. : 1. The Family Court by the impugned judgment and decree directed the appellant husband to pay a sum of Rs.500/- per month to the respondent wife and Rs.250/- per month to each of two children, born out of the wedlock, namely Mast. Pratik and Ms. Payal w.e.f. 19th February, 1995. The order further records that the amount paid by the husband under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. till the date of the order would get set off. 2. It is not in dispute that the husband in the present appeal has demonstrated that the wife was already employed during the relevant period. On that basis, during the pendency of this appeal, the Court : 2 : fca-53-00=.doc stayed the operation of the decree requiring the husband to pay monthly maintenance amount to the wife in the sum of Rs.500/-. In other words, the appellant husband was required to pay monthly maintenance amount only to two children in the sum of Rs.250/- per month each. The appellant husband has already paid that amount from time to time as it was deducted directly from the salary of appellant husband. 3. The two children have since become major in June, 2009. It is also not in dispute that the two children are presently gainfully employed. Insofar as the amount already paid to the two children by the husband, which was deducted directly from his salary, the husband is not challenging the direction given by the Family Court in that behalf. In other words, to that extent, the appeal is not pressed. We, however, place on record that some Darkhast proceedings are pending before the Family Court. However, as the children have already become major in June, 2009 and that they are now gainfully employed, Counsel appearing for the respondent wife on instructions states that the Darkhast proceedings will not be pursued further by them. As aforesaid, since the two children have now become major and more so, gainfully employed, the question of payment of maintenance amount to them does not arise. : 3 : fca-53-00=.doc 4. For the aforesaid reason, even the second part of the decree passed by the Family Court would get worked out during the pendency of the present appeal. Counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the respondent will not pursue any action against the appellant husband for recovery of maintenance amount, ordered by the Family Court, as she is already gainfully employed. 5. Accordingly, the appeal partly succeeds to the extent of direction of payment of monthly maintenance amount of Rs.500/- to the respondent wife. That decree is set aside, by consent. The second part of the decree is worked out as stated above. Thus, no further order is necessary except to place on record, the assurance given by the respondent through Counsel that the Darkhast proceedings filed by the respondent for and on behalf of the two children, will not be proceeded further and will be dropped. 6. Appeal disposed of accordingly. (R.Y.GANOO, J.) (A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.)