FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPLICATION NO.136 OF 2008 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.73 OF 2007 AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO.137 OF 2008 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.69 OF 2007 ------------------------------------:---------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of : Court’s or Judge’s orders. coram, appearances, Court’s orders : or directions and Registrar’s : orders. : ------------------------------------:----------------------------------- Mr Harihar Bhave i/b Bhave and Co., for the applicant-husband. Mrs Hina Mody, for the respondent-wife. CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE & D.B.BHOSALE,JJ. DATE : 02/09/2008 P.C.: Heard Mr Bhave, the learned counsel for the applicant-husband. Mrs Mody, the learned counsel, appears for the respondent-wife. The applicant-husband prays for a direction to the respondent-wife to accept Flat No. D-3/46, Asmita Jyoti Co-operative Housing Society Ltd, Marve Road Naka, Near fire Brigade, Malad (W),Mumbai, as a decent alternative accommodation at Mumbai, to the suit premises, i.e. Flat No.104, Amar Tower, Juhu Beekay CHS Ltd, Anandrao Deole Marg, Juhu, Mumbai. The husband further prays for a direction to hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the suit premises, i.e. Flat No.104, Amar Tower, Juhu Beekay CHS Ltd, Anandrao Deole Marg,Juhu, Mumbai. Mr Bhave has also pointed out that the respondent wife, who is in occupation of the suit premises, has not paid the normal maintenance charges to the society and as of now the arrears to the extent of Rs. five lacs are due to be paid to the society. He has further pointed out that the wife has her own source of income. The husband also alleges that the wife has been using some part of the suit flat as a paying guest accommodation. Mrs Mody, the learned counsel for the respondent wife, has invited our attention to the affidavit in reply filed and she has denied the allegation that the wife is letting a part of the suit house for paying guest. Admittedly, the applicant husband is at present staying at Ahamadabad. The Family Court, while directing that the wife will continue to stay in the suit premises which was her matrimonial house until a decent alternate accommodation in Mumbai city is provided by the husband, has relied upon the decisions of the Supreme Court in the case of B.P.Achala Anand I (2005)-345-SC and Mala Vishwanathan, II (2003) DMC 809. We direct that during the pendency of the appeals filed by both the spouses, the wife shall continue to occupy the suit premises unless a decent alternative accommodation, as directed by the Family Court, is provided to her. We also direct that the wife shall not let any part of the house (the suit premises) to a paying guest or to any third party on consideration or without consideration and she shall be liable to pay the maintenance charges including the arrears in respect of the said premises to the concerned co-operative housing society. Arrears of maintenance or on any other count in respect of the suit premises shall be cleared by the wife within a period of four weeks from today. The application is disposed off in terms of the above directions. Civil Application No.137 of 2008 in F.C.A No.69 OF 2007 stands disposed off in view of the order passed in Civil Application No.136 of 2008. (D.B.BHOSALE,J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)