1 WP2476.11.sxw JPP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2476 OF 2011 Mr. Ravi Vijay Bisawa. ... Petitioner. V/s. Mrs. Manisha Ravi Bisawa. ... Respondent. Mr. Bharat H. Mehta i/b. Mr. Deven M. Gopani for the Petitioner. Mrs. Manisha Ravi Bisawa, Respondent in person present. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. DATED : 29th MARCH 2011. P.C. :- The Petitioner has filed proceedings under Hindu Marriage Act in the Family Court at Bombay being Petition No.A-643 of 2009. In the said case the Respondent has filed Interim Application No. 9 of 2010 for maintenance. The said application at Exhibit 18 was decided by the learned Judge of the Family Court by order dated 11th January 2011. The learned Judge of the Family Court has ordered the Petitioner to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.8,000/- per month from the date of filing Exhibit 18. 2 WP2476.11.sxw 2. I have heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner as well as the Respondent. After going through the impugned order dated 11th January 2011, I am inclined to observe that the quantum of maintenance arrived at by the learned Judge of the Family Court is reasonable. It was argued by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the wife had left the job by 7th December 2008 though she had ability to work and this aspect has not been considered. In so far as this aspect is concerned, if the Respondent was without any job on the day when she had filed the application for maintenance, the learned Judge rightly arrived at a conclusion that she was entitled for maintenance. 3. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner contended that he has instructions to say that the Respondent is working with J.K. Khan and Associates as Assistant Accountant. However, he could not produce any authentic record in that behalf. Since, the Respondent was present in the Court, I inquired with her as to whether she is presently unemployed and if so, from what date. The Respondent knows English, she informed the Court that she is unemployed since 7th December 2008 till today. Statement made by the Respondent is accordingly noted. 4. If the Petitioner has material to show that the Respondent is working and is earning, it will be open for the Petitioner to apply to the learned Judge of the Family Court for modification of order dated 11th January 2011. Needless to 3 WP2476.11.sxw mention that if at all any order is passed, same shall be from the month of February 2011 and not prior to February 2011. 5. For the reasons mentioned aforesaid, following order is passed :- (i) The Petition is rejected at the stage of admission. (R.Y. GANOO, J.)