Oral Judgment:
Heard Mr. Mohammad Ateeque, learned Advocate for the applicant and Mr. A.V. Khare, learned Advocate for respondent.
2. Admitted. Heard finally by consent of the parties.
3. The applicant is admittedly the husband of non-applicant Rabiya Parveen. The non-applicant has filed an Application before the Family Court for grant of maintenance u/s. 125 of the Cr.P.C. The applicant is the resident of village Deoli, Tah.Deoli, Dist. Wardha. The non-applicant Mrs. Rabiya Parveen's parents are resident of Amravati. During the course of pendency of the Application for grant of maintenance, the Family Court has granted interim maintenance to the non-applicant. Written statement has been filed by the applicant in response to the application filed by the non-applicant before the Family Court for grant of maintenance. In the said written statement, a preliminary objection is raised regarding jurisdiction of Nagpur Court to hear the application of the non-applicant.
4. Learned Advocate Mr. Ateeque for the applicant has submitted that the non-applicant has been staying at Amravati along with her parents and, therefore, she could have filed an application for maintenance either at Deoli or at Dhamangaon, Dist.Amravati, the Court having jurisdiction over the place of residence of parents of the non-applicant.
5. Mr A.V. Khare, learned counsel for non-applicant has brought to my notice that the non-applicant in her Application has stated that she is staying with her maternal uncle at Nagpur and, therefore, the Application for grant of maintenance has been filed at Nagpur.
6. Learned Advocate Mr Ateeque wants the issue of jurisdiction to be decided as a preliminary issue before the Application for grant of maintenance is to be heard. In my view, the prayer is unreasonable and not tenable. Since the non-applicant has made a statement in her Application that she is staying with her material uncle at Nagpur, in my view, she can file an Application for grant of maintenance at Nagpur. In any event, the issue with regard to jurisdiction can be decided at the time of final hearing.
7. In view thereof, the issue raised by the applicant will have to be decided at the time of final hearing of the Application. The present Application is devoid of any merit and is dismissed with no order as to costs. Ad-interim order, if any stands vacated. The trial Court shall decide the issue of territorial jurisdiction without being influenced by any observations made by this Court in the present order in that regard.