1 CP-16-10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Mhi CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 16 OF 2010 IN F.C.A. NO. 189 OF 2008 Ms. Pratima Lakhotia ... Petitioner (Decree Holder) Vs. Mr. Sunil B.Lakhotia ... Respondent (Judgment Debtor) Ms. Pratima Lakhotia, petitioner in person present. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE : 7th October, 2010. P.C. 1. heard the petitioner in person. Inspite of service on the respondent by substituted service, he is not present. 2. The present petitioner is the wife of the respondent. She had filed a petition before the Family Court, Mumbai at Bandra, seeking residential accommodation being a 3-bedroom furnished flat and maintenance for herself and for child as well as for return of Stridhan. The decree was passed by the Family Court. That decree was challenged by the husband in Family Court Appeal No. 189 of 2008. The Appeal was partly allowed and the decree in respect of return of Sridhan was set aside. As far as the residential accommodation is concerned, 2 CP-16-10.sxw the Court directed that she can be provided accommodation anywhere between Andheri and Borivali and unless accommodation is provided, he should pay rent of Rs.10,000/- per month. The order of the Family Court to pay maintenance to the wife and the child was maintained. Thus, the decree of the trial court with certain modification has been maintained. The decree of the Family Court can be executed like any decree of the Civil Court and the Family Court itself can execute that decree under Sectino 18 of the Family Court Act. There is nothing on record to show that the respondent had given any undertaking before this Court which has been violated or that he had committed breach of any particular order. It is simply a case of execution of the decree in favour of the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner can take appropriate action for execution of the decree. 3. With the aforesaid observations, the Contempt Petition stands disposed of. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)