1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1733 OF 2009 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders. Mr. A.T.Gade, for the petitioner. Mr A.S.Khandeparkar with Mr Anilkumar Joshi for the respondent. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATE : 16/11/2009 PC: Heard learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition challenges the order dated 13.6.2008 passed by the Family Court on the applications filed by the petitioner-wife and the respondent- husband at Exhibits 20 and 22 respectively. The petitioner, by her application, prayed for enhancement of maintenance. From perusal of the order, it is clear that the maintenance has been enhanced. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has T 2 instructions not to challenge the order granting enhancement of the maintenance. However, he submits that the Family Court, while passing the impugned order dated 13.6.2008, did not pass any order on Interim Application No.313 of 2007. By that application, the petitioner had prayed for injunction against the respondent-husband from creating any charge or lien or mortgage or dispose of or relinquish right, title and interest or assign right, title or interest in favour of any body in her matrimonial home, viz. Flat no.201, plot no.302, Sector 21 , Nerul, Navi Mumbai. The petitioner also prayed for direction to the respondent to allow her to occupy/ stay/enter in her matrimonial home. I have perused the order dated 1.2.2008 passed by the Family Court disposing of Interim Application Nos.312 and 313 of 2007 filed by the petitioner. Interim Application No.312 of 2007 was filed for interim maintenance. The petitioner 3 challenged the order dated 1.2.2008 passed on the aforementioned two interim applications by way of writ petition in this court and she sought only enhancement of the maintenance and did not challenge observations made in the order dated 1.2.2008, which clearly indicates that her prayer for injunction, as prayed in Interim Application No.313 of 2007, was rejected. Even in the instant writ petition, the petitioner does not challenge the order dated 1.2.2008 passed on the application at Exhibit 313 of 2007. In the circumstances, I do not find any substance in the writ petition. The petition fails and dismissed as such. (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) 4