1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 123 OF 2009 WITH Civil Application No. 10851 of 2009 Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders 1. Heard Shri S.V.Kurundkar, Advocate, holding for Shri R.N.Deokar, Advocate for the appellants. 2. This appeal from order is filed being aggrieved by order dated 18.9.2009 passed by II Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nanded, on applications below Exhibits 64 and 81 in Special Civil Suit No.173 of 2008. The applications were for grant of temporary injunction restraining defendant Nos. 2 to 4 who are the employers and officers of defendant No.1 from making payment of half amount which was due and payable to present respondent No.1 who is 2 original defendant No.1 and who was working in Nanded Textile Mills, Nanded. An amount of Rs.4,34,358/= was due and payable to defendant No. 1­present respondent No.1 towards V.R.S. salary and he was entitled to provident fund of Rs.60,044/=. from defendant Nos. 2 to 4­who are present respondent Nos.2 to 4. 3. It is the case of the appellants that appellant No.1 is the first wife of respondent No. 1 and appellant Nos. 2 and 3 are the daughters born out of the said wedlock. Respondent No.1 took voluntary retirement and as such above said amounts were due and payable to him. 4. Learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nanded, by the impugned order directed that an amount of Rs.1,00,000/= be kept in Fixed Deposit in the name of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nanded till final decision of the 3 suit, that too on concession. 5. No legal right is shown to have accrued to the appellants, merely because appellant No.1 is the wife and appellant Nos. 2 and 3 are the daughters of respondent No.1 to claim 1/2 share in the amount of salary and/or G.P.F. of respondent No.1. It is not that any amount towards maintenance of the appellants is due and for non payment thereof attachment of particular portion of the amounts payable to respondent No. 1 is sought. Application is in the nature of application for temporary injunction. 6. In my opinion, such an application is not tenable in law and the civil court does not seem to have committed any error in not granting relief prayed for by appellants herein. In this view of the matter, appeal from order deserves to be and is 4 accordingly dismissed at the admission stage. 7. It is made clear that if any amount is due towards maintenance of appellants and for that they want to take out appropriate proceedings against respondent no.1 for attachment of certain amount due and payable to respondent No.1, the appellants are at liberty to take out such proceedings and this decision will not come in their way. 8. In view of dismissal of appeal from order, civil application No.10851 of 2009 does not survive and the same stands disposed of as such. Date:14/10/2009 (P.R.BORKAR, J.) pnd/ao123.09