IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Application No. 1784 of 2005 In Writ Petition No. 732 of 2003 In Interim Misc. Application No. 123 of 2002 In Family Court Petition No. C-88 of 2002 Jairam H. Gowda .. Applicant (Orig. Resp. No. 1) V/s. Sunita J. Gowda & ORs. .. Opponents (Nos. 1 to 3 being the Orig. Petitioners and No. 4 being the Orig. Respon. No.2) Mr. Pankaj S. Shah for the Applicant Mr. P.R. Naidu for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 Respondent No. 1 is personally present. (IN CHAMBER : AT 2:30 PM.) (IN CHAMBER : AT 2:30 PM.) (IN CHAMBER : AT 2:30 PM.) CORAM : DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. CORAM : DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. CORAM : DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. DATED : 22.12.2005. DATED : 22.12.2005. DATED : 22.12.2005. P.C.:- P.C.:- P.C.:- 1. Heard Mr. Pankaj Shah, the learned counsel for the Applicant and Mr. P.R. Naidu, the learned counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. 2. Respondent No. 1-Sunita J. Gowda who is personally present, categorically states that the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have already attained the age of majority and she does not wish to have any maintenance on their behalf, however, she would like to continue to receive the maintenance for herself, i.e. a sum of Rs. 10,000/- per month (Rs. Ten Thousand Only), from the Applicant husband Jairam H. Gowda. (2) 3. Mr. Pankaj Shah, the learned counsel for the Applicant categorically states that the Applicant in the present Civil Application, being the original Respondent No. 1-Jairam H. Gowda will continue to pay Rs. 10,000/- per month, as directed earlier in the above proceedings. 4. The Respondent No. 1-Sunita J. Gowda, being the original Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 732 of 2003 very categorically states that she does not desire to proceed with the above proceedings and she is desirous of withdrawing the above Writ Petition, however she is only keen that the Applicant should keep on paying her a sum of Rs. 10,000/-, which the learned counsel for the Applicant categorically assures that the Applicant would regularly pay to the said Sunita J. Gowda. Under these circumstances, in Writ Petition No. 732 of 2003, Rule stands discharged. In view thereof, no order on the Civil Application No. 1784 of 2005 and Civil Application No. 1785 of 2005, both stands dismissed. (DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.)