1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1290 OF 2007 (Mrs. Seema Ujwal Loya vs. Mr. Ujwal Prabhudayal Loya ) 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. SEPTEMBER 04, 2008. Heard Shri Khamborkar, Advocate for the applicant - wife and Shri Gadling, Advocate for the respondent – husband. During hearing, it has been pointed out that the applicant – wife had engaged advocate for prosecuting the proceedings before the Family Court. The said advocate appeared on number of occasions but he did not cross examine the respondent – husband. Thereafter on 5.10.2006, evidence of the respondent was closed and the matter was adjourned for evidence of present applicant. On 2.11.2007, Family Court granted last chance and mater was adjourned to 20.11.2007. Again on that date, the respondent sought adjournment and matter was fixed for arguments on 7.12.2007 by closing the side of present applicant – wife. On 7.12.2007, the Court adjourned the matter to 17.12.2007 upon application for adjournment 2 moved by the applicant's advocate. The husband was present before Family Court while the wife was absent. On 7.12.2007, the applicant - wife has sworn an affidavit at Nagpur before Notary in support of her application under Section 24 of Civil Procedure Code i.e. present application. All these relevant developments are not disclosed. The reason put forth for transfer is, the applicant is a woman, she has minor son aged about 4 years and she has no independent source of income. It is also pleaded that there is no one to assist her in the matter. Ill- health of parents is also pointed out. However, the developments before the Family Court are not at all pointed out to this Court and on 14.12.2007, ad interim relief came to be granted and proceedings before the Family Court were stayed. Thus, at the stage of arguments, the proceedings before the Family Court have been stopped. Even thereafter, these developments are not brought to the notice of this Court and no explanation is offered as to why these developments could not be pointed out. The arguments advanced are that because of her condition mentioned above, the applicant could not appear before the Family Court and could not participate in the proceedings. 3 In the circumstances, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter at this stage when proceedings before the Family Court are for final arguments. Miscellaneous Civil Application is, therefore, rejected. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.