Megha 15_wp_9049_2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.9049 OF 2016 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (STAMP) NO.803 OF 2021 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (STAMP) NO.864 OF 2021 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1745 OF 2019 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.15968 OF 2023 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (STAMP) NO. 793 OF 2021 IN WRIT PETITION NO.9049 OF 2016 Balu Parvati Urf Prabhu Hagawane ...Petitioner V/s. Smt. Bhagubai Parvati Urf Parbhu Hagawane and Ors. ...Respondent ________________ Ms. Gunjan Shah i/b. Ms. Kayval P. Shah for the Petitioner. Mr. Omkar Somvanshi i/b. Mr. Tejas Deshmukh for Respondent Nos.2 and 3. ________________ CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATED: 2 SEPTEMBER 2026. P.C.: 1) Petition challenges order dated 11 July 2016 passed by the 4th Additional Judge, Small Causes Court and Jt. C.J.S.D., Pune, on Page No. 1 of 5 2 September 2026 26:BHC-AS:1 Megha 15_wp_9049_2016 Application at Exhibit-63 taken out by Defendant Nos.2 and 3 in Special Civil Suit No.1614 of 2013. The Application was filed seeking maintenance of Rs.50,000/- per month in a Suit filed by the Plaintiff for partition. The Trial Court has sanctioned the amount of Rs.30,000/- per month payable from 25 February 2016 till disposal of the Suit. 2) I have heard Ms. Shah, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. Somvanshi, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent Nos.2 and 3 and have considered the submissions canvassed by them. 3) By order dated 2 May 2018 this Court has directed as under:- 1. Heard Mr. Shah, learned counsel for the Petitioner, and Mr. Deshmukh, learned counsel for Respondent Nos.2 and 3. 2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that, the Petitioner is all along ready to handover partition and separate possession of the share in the suit property to Respondent Nos.2 and 3; however, they are not coming forward to do so. 3. Learned counsel for Respondent Nos.2 and 3 submits that, the Trial Court has referred the matter for mediation. 4. In view thereof, in order to enable the parties to arrive at an amicable settlement, stand over to 4th July 2018. 5. At this stage, it is pointed out by learned counsel for Respondent Nos.2 and 3 that, in the impugned order, the Trial Court has referred in para No.10 that,“during the course of argument, the Plaintiff has shown willingness to pay the amount of maintenance to the tune of Rs.10,000/- per month to Respondent Nos.2 and 3”. It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that, the Petitioner has deposited the amount of maintenance @ Rs.10,000/- per month and Respondent Nos.2 and 3 may be permitted to withdraw the said amount. Page No. 2 of 5 2 September 2026 Megha 15_wp_9049_2016 6. In my considered opinion, it being a fair proposal and otherwise also, the matter is under mediation, it would be proper that Respondent Nos.2 and 3, who is the widow and minor daughter, to withdraw the amount of maintenance, which is deposited in the Trial Court. Ordered accordingly. 7. S.O. to 4th July 2018. 4) Ms. Shah submits that husband of Respondent No.2 could at the highest have only 1/8th share in the suit property since there are two brothers, five sisters and mother, who are sharers in the suit properties. She further submits that the Petitioner/Plaintiff has repeatedly oferred 1/8th share in the suit properties to Defendant Nos.2 and 3. However, they are refusing to accept the same. She submits that when proceedings were sent for mediation, the Petitioner offered land admeasuring 45.53 R to Respondent Nos.2 and 3 representing their 1/8th share in the suit properties. However, Respondent Nos.2 and 3 have not shown any interest in accepting the same. 5) Mr. Somvanshi submits that share of Respondent Nos.2 and 3 is actually ½ when other sisters have actually relinquished their share in the suit properties. Ms. Shah counters this by submitting that relinquishment was effected by the sisters in favour of the Petitioner and not in favour of Defendant Nos. 2 and 3. She therefore submits that share of Defendant Nos.2 and 3 would continue to remain 1/ 8th. She further submits that in pursuance of order dated 2 May 2018, the Petitioner has deposited amount of Rs.10,000/- in this Court upto August-2026. Total amount deposited so far is Rs.11,80,000/-. Ms. Shah further submits that Page No. 3 of 5 2 September 2026 Megha 15_wp_9049_2016 Defendant No.3 has now become major and has been married and that her requirement for maintenance has come to an end. 6) The partition Suit is filed in the year 2013 and the same continues to remain pending even till date. One of the reasons why the Suit has not been decided is pendency of the present Petition. In my view, therefore, it is necessary to dispose of the Petition for the purpose of facilitating expeditious decision of the Suit. The arrangement made by this Court vide order dated 2 May 2018 for deposit of Rs.10,000/- per month needs to be continued during pendency of the Suit. 7) I accordingly proceed to pass the following order:- (i) Order dated 11 July 2016 passed by the Trial Court is modified by reducing the amount of maintenance to Rs.10,000/- per month. (ii) The Petitioner shall continue to deposit amount of Rs.10,000/- per month during pendency of the Suit in the Trial Court. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 shall be at liberty to withdraw the entire deposited amount in this Court alongwith accrued interest. (iii) The Trial Court shall proceed to decide the Suit as expeditiously as possible on its own merits. (iv) It is clarified that nothing observed in the order shall be construed as an observation relating to merits of the Suit. 8) With the above directions, the Petition is disposed of. Page No. 4 of 5 2 September 2026 Megha 15_wp_9049_2016 9) In view of disposal of the Petition, the Civil /Interim Applications do not survive and hence stand disposed of. [SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.] Page No. 5 of 5 2 September 2026 Signed by: Megha S. Parab Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 07/09/2026 11:16:04