Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2019 DAILYLAW 3202 (BOM)

AVINASH S/O. VITHALRAO DUDHMAL v. SHITAL W/O. AVINASH DUDHMAL

APPLN/1124/2019 · 2026-08-20

body2019

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

*1* 902appln1124o19 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1124 OF 2019 IN REVNST/102/2019 AVINASH S/O. VITHALRAO DUDHMAL VERSUS SHITAL W/O. AVINASH DUDHMAL ... None for the Applicant. ... CORAM : SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J. DATE : 20 August 2026 P. C. :- 1. Even today, none appears for the applicant. 2. On the last occasion on 13.08.2026, this Court has observed that if nobody appears for the applicant, this Court would proceed with the matter in accordance with law. 3. The dispute between the parties is matrimonial. The applicant has challenged the judgment and order dated 04.12.2017 passed by the learned Family Court, Nanded, in Petition No.E-63/2016 thereby, awarding maintenance of Rs.3000/- per month to the wife. However, there is delay of 386 days in filing the revision. 2026:BHC-AUG:37771 *2* 902appln1124o19 4. For the reasons stated in the application, delay is condoned. Criminal Application No.1124/2019 is disposed of. 5. Revision Application is taken up for hearing. I have perused the impugned order. I find that the learned Family Court has rightly awarded the compensation. In view of the reasoning given by the Family Court, no interference is warranted. There is no error or mistake in the impugned order. As such, there is no merit in the revision application. The Revision Application is dismissed. kps ( SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J. )