1 fca-27-11.doc pdp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELALTE JURISDICTION FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 27 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 52 OF 2011 Mr. Rudolf Lobo .. Appellant Vs. Mrs. Vini Rudolf Lobo .. Respondent Mr. Rajendra C. Dhuru for appellant. Mr. Mohan K. Ghadigaonkar for respondent. CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE & SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. August 16, 2011. P.C. 1. We have heard Mr. Dhuru, the learned counsel for the appellant-husband, who is aggrieved by the order dated 2/12/2010 passed by the Family Court at Mumbai. The respondent-wife had filed Petition No.B-51 of 2006 before the Family Court for a mandatory injunction 2 fca-27-11.doc against the husband restraining him from preventing her entry to the matrimonial home. On receipt of notice from the Family Court, the husband appeared and filed Written Statement. It is evident that he did not dispute the matrimonial relationship. He further went on to state that he did not drove the wife out of the matrimonial home. He contended that it was the wife who had left the matrimonial home on her own accord and that since 1987 there was no physical relationship between him and the wife. 2. The learned Judge of the Family Court considered the evidence of both the parties as well as the arguments advanced and held that the husband had caused obstruction to the wife from entering into the matrimonial home i.e. Room No. 3, Asha Sadan, Nardas Nagar, Bhandup, Mumbai. The Family Court further held that there was no material in support of the allegations that the husband was trying to sell or mortgage the matrimonial home. We are satisfied that the relief granted in favour of the wife is based on sound reasoning and no interference, therefore, is called for in the directions issued by the Family Court. 3. The appeal is dismissed. 3 fca-27-11.doc 4. Civil Application No. 52 of 2011 does not survive and the same shall stand disposed as such. (SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.)