1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.258/2011 SAU. VARSHA PRAVIN MEN ..VS.. PRAVIN KRISHNARAO MEN - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri Chopde, advocate for petitioner. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : 2ND FEBRUARY, 2011. By this petition, the petitioner impugns the order passed by the trial court on 26.10.2010, dismissing an application filed by the petitioner for dismissing the Hindu Marriage Petition filed by the respondent and or staying the said petition till the respondent deposited the arrears of maintenance in the court. The respondent/ husband had filed a petition against the petitioner-wife under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights. In an application filed by the petitioner under section 24 of the Act, the trial court had granted interim alimony to the petitioner at Rs.1000/-. According to the petitioner, the respondent was in arrears of maintenance amount to the tune of Rs.14,000/- and since he was intentionally and deliberately avoiding to deposit the amount, the petition was liable to be dismissed or stayed till he deposited the amount. The respondent filed his reply and stated that he had deposited the amount of Rs.5000/- and Rs.2000/- in the Washim Court and an amount of Rs.3,000/- in the Akola Court and he was also ready to deposit remaining amount and sought for the dismissal of the application. The trial court on hearing the learned counsel for the 2 parties, dismissed the application filed by the petitioner. On hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the impugned order dated 26.10.2010, it appears that the trial court did not commit any error in dismissing the application filed by the petitioner. The trial court found that the respondent was ready to deposit the amount and he had also deposited a substantial amount in the Washim Court and in the court at Akola. The trial court further found that the husband had not filed a petition for divorce and had filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights. In the aforesaid set of facts, the court was of the opinion that it was not necessary to either dismiss the petition for restitution of conjugal rights or keep it in abeyance till the respondent paid the entire amount. The trial court found that the respondent was depositing the amount of Rs.2,000/- on the date of the impugned order in the court. According to the trial court, in case the respondent failed to deposit the balance amount the petitioner could have recovered the same by filing execution proceedings. The reasons recorded by the trial court for rejecting the application are just and proper and the order calls for no interference in exercise of the writ jurisdiction. In the result, the writ petition fails and is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE SMP