1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 1536/2010. Balbirsingh Gyansingh Chagger .vrs. Kamajeetkaur Balbirsingh Chagger and others. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : JUNE 11, 2010. Heard Shri H.I. Kothari, learned counsel for petitioner and Shri R.L. Khapre, learned counsel for respondents. A disputed question about the amounts actually received by the office of the Family Court, after deductions from salary of petitioner / employee and amount withdrawn by the present respondents towards maintenance arise. Shri Kothari, learned counsel is striving hard to show that for the period from 06.05.1999 till 23.11.2003 the amount of Rs. 1700/- paid every month needed to be adjusted and though that amount is already received by ignoring that payment recovery at Rs. 3500/- per month has been claimed by the respondents. He further states that in the process amount of Rs. 90,000/- has been received in excess by the respondents. He therefore, states that the further recovery of amount of maintenance from the salary of petitioner needs to be stayed with direction to the Family Court to reconcile the accounts. He further points out that the summary of payments received by the respondents is served upon him today only and he will like to verify the 2 position as appearing therein. Shri Khapre, learned counsel points out that the Family Court has after hearing the parties passed the impugned orders. He further states that no interference is warranted in the matter. I find that after present petitioner raised objection before the Family Court in execution, the Family Court has on 02.05.2010 stayed orders passed below Exh.34 until further orders. It has not been shown to this Court that, that order has been vacated. It is not very clear that Exh.34 is finally disposed of or not. Shri Khapre, learned counsel has contended that by the impugned order dated 02.03.2010 Exh.34 is disposed of. While according to Shri Kothari, learned counsel that order is passed below Exh. 44 and 46, and Exh.34 is still pending. The impugned order mentions that employer of petitioner is vide letter dated 29.07.2008 pointed out that from April, 2005 till January, 2008 the amount of maintenance has been deducted from the salary of petitioner and has been forwarded to the Court regularly. The amount so deducted has been mentioned to be Rs. 2,00,023/-. The summary produced by the petitioner shows that the total amount of Rs. 4,55,000/- is due from May, 1999 till February 2010. The summary does not show that the amount of Rs. 2,00,023/- has been deposited between 2005 to 2008 with the office of the Family Court. In this situation, I am not in a position to record any final finding of facts for the first time at this stage. Shri Kothari, learned counsel has requested this 3 Court to stay the further recovery till the position is verified by the Family Court. However, I find that the obligation to pay maintenance is cast upon the petitioner and if any excess payment is shown that amount can very well be adjusted forwards the future maintenance. I, therefore, find the impugned order dated 02.03.2010 passed below Exh.,44 and 46 unsustainable, the same is accordingly quashed and set aside. The Family Court shall look into the accounts being furnished by the respondents along with the records of the amounts in deposit with it and find out whether the contention of petitioner about excess recovery from salary is justified or not. Looking to the grievance being made by the petitioner and the amount of Rs. 18,500/- per month being deducted from his salary, the Family Court is directed to complete this exercise as early as possible and in any case by 31.07.2010. The parties to appear before the Family Court in R.D.No. 25/2004 on 24.06.2010 and to abide by its further instructions in the matter. Shri Kothari, learned counsel has pointed out that in obedience to the interim directions of this Court, an amount of Rs. 40,000/- has been deposited with the Registry of this Court to show his bonafides. Needless to mention that the said amount shall be adjusted after appropriate orders in this respect are passed by the Family Court. Writ Petition is allowed. Rule accordingly. No costs. JUDGE Rgd.