:1: :1: :1: IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8607 OF 2007 Mrs.Chang Kuie Yun ...Petitioner Versus Mr.Liang Keng Yuan ....Respondent Mr.K.K.Jadhav and Mr.J.K.Jadhav Adv. for the petitioner. Mrs.Madhubala Shetty, Adv. for respondent. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. 24th January, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : 1. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner wife has challenged the order below Exhibit-7 and 8 dated 10.9.2007. 2. Exhibit-7 is an application filed by the petitioner wife who is the original Respondent in A-2014 of 2005 which is pending on the file of the Family court at Bandra, Mumbai. Exhibit-8 is an Application which is filed by the Respondent- Husband claiming maintenance from the wife for himself. :2: :2: :2: 3. The Learned Judge took up these applications together and by a common order directed the wife to pay maintenance to the husband at the rate of Rs.25,000/- per month. At the same time, the learned judge rejected the application of the wife for interim maintenance from the husband. 4. This petition was placed before me for admission and considering the fact that, on the date of filing of the petition, the husband was 64 yeas of age, so also the wife, the matter was placed for hearing in chambers at the request of parties. They were praying for time to amicably resolve the dispute. 5. It appears that both the husband and wife are senior citizens. The wife is residing alongwith one of the son and the grand children, whereas, the husband is residing alone at Colaba, Mumbai. 6. Since, allegations have been made that the wife is travelling and is in Canada or Dubai, time was granted to the Advocate for the petitioner-wife to take instructions from the sons who are supporting the :3: :3: :3: wife/mother allegedly. Time was also granted because the husband made a grievance before me that the children have neglected him. He has not been invited for family functions and is suffering in old age. The petitioner-wife had contended before the Family Court that she does not have independent source of income and is supported by children. The Respondent Husband also prayed for financial assistance. At the joint request of parties, the son and grand-daughter were allowed to attend the hearing in chambers. The son residing abroad, who is present before me, agreed to put the mother in funds so that some amount can be paid over to the mother as well as father. 7. After the matter was heard for some time, both sides agree to the following order being passed : (i) The petitioner wife gives up her claim for Interim maintenance at this stage. However, she reserves liberty to apply for interim maintenance at a subsequent stage. Her application for interim maintenance is therefore allowed to be withdrawn and :4: :4: :4: dismissed as such with liberty as prayed. (ii) Insofar as, the respondent husband is concerned, at this stage, he does not press for any interim maintenance. It is agreed by the parties that the wife would deposit without prejudice to the rights and contentions of both sides a sum of Rs.20,000/- in the Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai. This sum would be made available to the respondent wife by her son, Weni Langi. He shall remit the sums in the Bank Account of the mother at Mumbai, who shall thereafter arrange for the deposit in the Family Court. Thus, upon the son putting the mother into funds, she will deposit the above sum monthly. The son is present before me and has made a statement that he would abide by the order and direction of this court and remit the sums into the Account of his mother. Statement accepted. (iii) The first deposit would be made on 10.3.2008 and thereafter on Tenth of each :5: :5: :5: subsequent month till the Matrimonial Petition is heard and disposed off. The deposit and receipt are without prejudice to the rights and contentions of both sides. (iv) In case any default is committed, in addition to moving this court for breach of the order of this court, it would be open for the respondent-husband to apply for striking off the defence of the mother as well. (v) Considering the advanced age of both the husband and wife, the Family court to endeavour and dispose off the Matrimonial Petition No. A-2014 of 2005 pending on its filed as expeditiously as possible and by 31.3.2009. (vi) All contentions of both sides including on the maintainability of the proceedings are kept open. The Trial court to decide the matter without being influenced by any observations made earlier, so also, this :6: :6: :6: interim arrangement. Needless to state, that the order passed by the Family Court on 10.9.2007 and impugned in this petition is quashed and set aside. The same stands substituted as above. 8. Petition disposed off. *********