:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 594 OF 2008 Ketan Premani ..Petitioner Vs. Jasminder Ketan Premani ..Respondent Mrs. Mrunalini Deshmukh i/by Mrs. Seema Sarnaik for petitioner. Ms. Iva Bansal for respondent. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE, J. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE, J. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE, J. Date : April 28, 2008. Date : April 28, 2008. Date : April 28, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard Mrs. Deshmukh with Mrs. Sarnaik the learned counsel for the petitioner-husband and Ms.Bansal the learned counsel for the respondent-wife. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the interlocutory orders passed by the Family Court on 29/6/2007 and 21/11/2007. By the first order the Family Court at Mumbai allowed the respondent-wife to :2: take both the children, Aditya and Pranav, to Chennai and get them admitted in the schools there. By the second order, the Family Court has dealt with the demand of regular access. It is the grievance of the petitioner that despite the Family Court’s order whenever he visits Chennai to meet the children, either the children are busy or they are meeting him under a watchful eye of some near relations or they are kept away from him under some or other pretext. In his additional affidavit, the father has enumerated instances wherein despite his visit to Chennai he could not meet either of the sons and he claims that the last meeting he had with the sons was on 5/8/2007 and thereafter they met him on 9/12/2007 for about one and half hours. 3. As per the order passed on 24/4/2008, the children met me today in the Chamber and having spent some time with them I am satisfied that any further shifting is bound to result in further academic loss and the elder son Aditya has already lost his one academic year on shifting from Mumbai to Chennai. Nonetheless, the children appeared to have settled in :3: their new schools at Chennai and they appeared to be reluctant in shifting to Mumbai. It would not be, therefore, in the interest of the children to disturb them now. 4. Mrs. Deshmukh the learned counsel for the petitioner-husband has referred to the order passed by this court on 24/1/2007 thereby disposing off Writ Petition Nos.8333 and 8334 of 2006. This court had confirmed the lump sum payment of Rs.50,000/- per month by way of interim maintenance for the wife and two sons, including the provision for residential accommodation and thereafter the Family Court allowed the respondent-wife to shift the children from Mumbai to Chennai mainly on the ground that they were living in an unhealthy atmosphere and perhaps in a broken house. 5. Be that as it may, this court has already passed an order directing the pending divorce petition (MJ Petition No.A-116 of 2006) filed by the petitioner - husband to be decided by 31st July, 2008. Both the :4: learned counsel agree that the marriage has reached a point of no return and despite the fact that the wife in her written statement has opposed the divorce petition, there is no doubt that the parties must settle their matrimonial discord and either they come together or they separate at the earliest possible so that the children are saved from further agony. It was, therefore, suggested that the parties should either sit together or exchange respective proposals for settlement of the matrimonial dispute in the form of MJ Petition No. 116 of 2006 and if the parties do not meet within a period of two weeks from today, it would be imperative and more so in the interest of the children that the pending Petition is finally decided by the Family Court as has been directed by this court earlier. 6. In the premises, this petition is disposed as under:- (a) The prayer for shifting the children back to Mumbai need not be considered at this :5: juncture. (b) The parties to meet/exchange proposals for settlement at the earliest possible and if the settlement does not come through by 31st May, 2008, the Family Court is directed to ensure that MJ Petition No.A-116 of 2006 is finally decided by 31st July, 2008 as directed earlier and if required the trial will go on day to day basis. (c) The husband must ensure that the monthly maintenance amount of Rs.50,000/- for each of the months from May, 2008 onwards is deposited with the Family Court by 10th of every month, till the divorce petition is decided. (d) The respondent-wife will attend the Family Court proceedings and more particularly if she has to record her evidence, as per the dates fixed by the Family Court and the same direction applies to the husband, as well. :6: (e) The list of witnesses shall be placed before the Family Court before 31/5/2008 by both the parties, in case the same has not yet been placed on record. . Needless to mention the issues of children’s custody and/or access and the final / permanent alimony shall be decided by the Family Court while adjudicating on MJ Petition No.A-116 of 2006 on their own merits and without being influence by any interlocutory orders passed earlier. (B.H. Marlapalle,J.) (B.H. Marlapalle,J.) (B.H. Marlapalle,J.)