1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 1002 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. WRIT PETITION NO.: 1002 OF 2011 *** 1. Heard Advocate Mr. Chapalgaonkar for Petitioner/ husband, Advocate Mr. Adhav for Respondent No.1. 2. Contention of Advocate Mr. Chapalgaonkar is, on 22nd March, 2010 a photostat copy of school leaving certificate was already on record and the witness from Zilla Parishad school, who was cross examined thereafter, could have been put the same or then could have been cross examined in relation to religion as disclosed in the photostat copy. He further points out that witness, to prove the religion of present petitioner, viz. Father Raju Stephan was also examined on 19th July, 2010 and said material could have been put to him. According to him, after closure of evidence of defendant/ petitioner, effort only is to harass him by re-opening entire controversy unnecessarily. 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 1002 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. 3. Shri Adhav, learned counsel for Respondent No.1 wife states that to refute the story of change of religion, the material has been filed before the Court and for that purpose, the witnesses are sought to be examined. 4. I have perused the impugned order. The trial Court has considered the controversy and, thereafter, found it necessary to give Respondent No.1/ wife necessary opportunity. She has filed suit for grant of maintenance. As I do not notice any jurisdictional error or perversity, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter. The petition is, therefore, not entertained. [B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J.] Dated:14/02/2011. ans/1002