1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6813 OF 2009 Bhakti Uday Mhamunkar .. Petitioner. Vs. Uday Balkrishna Mhamunkar .. Respondent. Mr.S.S.Gokhale for the petitioner. Ms.Pranali Kakade for the respondent. CORAM : D.B. BHOSALE, J. DATED : 1ST DECEMBER, 2009 P.C. . Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Rule. By consent, rule made returnable forthwith. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents waives service. By consent, the petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal at the admission stage itself. 3. This petition is directed against the order dated 13.7.2009 by which the petitioner’s application for interim maintenance has been rejected by the Family Court. Both the learned counsel for the parties have fairly stated that the order passed by the Family Court cannot be sustained in law. They have further stated that I need not record the reasons for disposing of this petition and they have agreed for the following order: The order dated 13.7.2009 passed by the Family Court on 2 the application at Exhibit-2 in Petition No.A-2592 of 2008 is set aside and the application at Exhibit-2 is restored to file. The Family Court shall consider the wife’s application at Exhibit-2 afresh on merits in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible and preferrably within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of this order. It is needless to state that the Family Court shall take into consideration the contentions of both the sides on question of income of the respondent, while dealing with the application for interim maintenance. All contentions of the parties are kept open. Rule is, accordingly, made absolute. No costs. (D. B. Bhosale, J.)