1 F. Court Appeal. No..20.09 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.20 OF 2009 Miss.Shalini D/o Yosef Dusing, Age 20 years,Occup.Education, R/o Shivaji Kambale, Ashanagar,H.No.16, Nandanvan Colony, Aurangabad. C/o Sau Sitabai Yosef Dusing,R/o Nanadanvan Colony, Aurangabad. ...APPELLANT. VERSUS Yosef S/o Baburao Dusing, Age 46 years,Occu. Agriculture, R/o Deogaon Road,Tq.Shevgaon, District :Ahmednagar, (P.S.Shevgaon) ...RESPONDENTS. ... Smt.A.S.Mantri, Advocate for Appellant. None appears for Respondent. ... CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL AND K.K. TATED, JJ. DATE : 25TH AUGUST, 2010. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Smt.Mantri, learned counsel appearing for the 2 F. Court Appeal. No..20.09 appellant submits that the Family Court ought to have granted more amount towards marriage expenses of the appellant. The father of the appellant is not taking good care and looking after the needs of the appellant, therefore, appellant had approached the Family Court. 3. The learned counsel further submits that after issuance of notice, the respondent though appeared but preferred not to file written statement. The respondent was not available for cross examination of appellant and even did not lead any evidence. Therefore, the contentions raised by the appellant have gone unchallenged. The appellant had submitted a table of minimum expenses, which would be incurred during marriage of the appellant, to the tune of Rs.1,21,500/- (Rupees One Lakh Twenty One Thousand and Five Hundred only) before the Family Court, which is part of the petition filed under section 20 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act. 3 F. Court Appeal. No..20.09 4. We have perused the Judgment of the Family Court. We perused original record and proceedings too. We find that though respondent initially appeared but for the reasons best known to him, choose to remain absent and allowed the proceedings to go practically ex-parte. The Court had considered quality of evidence produced by the appellant. We even considered the issue in respect of expenditure on marriage of appellant. The Family Court observed in para No.11 of the judgment that Photo copy was produced in respect of School Leaving Certificate, residential proof, electricity bill. The Conciliator had interviewed both the parties jointly. On 20.06.2008 the appellant was present but the respondent was absent. It seems reconciliation and settlement efforts failed. 5. The appellant had approached the Family Court for claiming Rs,1,21,500/-(Rupees One Lakh Twenty One Thousand Five Hundred). In the light of reasoning adopted by the Family Court and in the 4 F. Court Appeal. No..20.09 facts of the case, we do not find any serious error in the impugned judgment and order. We also do not notice mis-reading of evidence. The appellant has failed to make out a case. The Family Court Appeal stands dismissed. 6. The Secretary, Legal Services Authority shall disburse professional fees to the Counsel in accordance with rules. Sd/- Sd/- [K.K. TATED, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL, J.] MTK