1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Writ Petition No.4151/2010 Rajhans s/o Rajaram Chakole Vs. Preeti w/o Rajhans Chakole Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mr. S. P. Bhandarkar, Adv. for the petitioner. Mr. Kothari, Adv. for respondent. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. NOVEMBER 15, 2010. Heard finally. The petitioner-husband produced reply dated 3/5/2010 opposing prayer under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act and it appears that he also moved application seeking leave to file it. That application was opposed on 5/5/2010. On 3/6/2010 the application was allowed and reply was directed to be taken on record, subject to payment of costs of Rs. 250/-. Till 27.7.2010 those costs were not paid and hence the Court proceeded further without reply. On 19.8.2010 the application was moved by another counsel, who sought leave to deposit that amount of costs. That application was 2 rejected. The parties were heard on application under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act and the matter was closed for orders on that application. Advocate Bhandarkar contends that as earlier counsel did not communicate petitioner the need to deposit costs, costs amount could not be deposited and ultimately matter proceeded without reply. The fact that earlier counsel did not cooperate was informed to trial Court but it has not been properly appreciated. Advocate Kothari on the other hand states that trial Court has correctly found that effort was to delay the adjudication of application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. He states that earlier counsel had not withdrawn Vakalatanama and reason given was found not proper. This Court has while issuing notice in the matter directed the petitioner-husband to deposit 3 Rs. 10,000/- to show his bonafides. Accordingly, that amount has been deposited with the Registry of this Court vide CCD No. 3472 dated 3/9/2010. The respondent-wife is claiming interim maintenance of Rs. 35,000/- p. m. and amount of Rs. 50,000/- towards litigation expenses. In reply-affidavit petitioner has urged that his monthly income is Rs. 3000/- per month. In this situation, I find it appropriate to direct the trial Court to accept the said reply on record if the petitioner deposits with the trial Court total costs of Rs. 500/- by 29 th November, 2010. If the costs are so deposited, the trial Court shall rehear the parties on Exhibit 15 by 10 th December, 2010 and shall pass appropriate orders on application under Section 24 by 21 st December, 2010. If the costs are not deposited by 29 th November, 2010 the trial Court shall proceed further from stage at which the matter was adjourned on 19.8.2010. 4 The amount in deposit with Registry of this Court shall be paid to the party succeeding in accordance with order to be passed by the trial Court on Exhibit 15. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. No costs. JUDGE Ambulkar.