Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Sahil Sanjay Rathod vs Swati Sahil Rathod on 11 August, 2025

Author: Mukulika Shrikant Jawalkar

Bench: Mukulika Shrikant Jawalkar

2025:BHC-NAG:7834-DB


                                                                                                         1                                                  A cao 619-2025.odt

                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                 NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

                                            CIVIL APPLICATION (CAO) NO. 619/2025
                                                             IN
                                              FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 57/2024
                                                            WITH
                                              FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 58/2024
                                                            WITH
                                         CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 194/2024

                                          Sahil Sanjay Rathod V/s. Sau. Swati Sahil Rathod
         - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- -
        Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,                                                                             Court's or Judge's orders
        appearances, Court's orders or directions
        and Registrar's orders
        - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- ------------ -
                                                                                 Shri R.R. Deo, Advocate for appellant.
                                                                                 Sau. Swati S. Rathod, respondent in-person

                                                                                 CORAM : SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR AND
                                                                                         PRAVIN S. PATIL, JJ.

RESERVED ON : 31.07.2025 PRONOUNCED ON: 11.08.2025

1. The Appellant has initiated three proceedings before this Court:

(i) First Appeal No. 58 of 2024 against the decree for Restitution of Conjugal Rights passed by the Family Court, Yavatmal;
(ii) Criminal Revision Application No. 194 of 2024 challenging the order passed under Section 125 Cr.P.C. in P.E. No. 74 of 2022; and
(iii) The challenges to the maintenance decree in P.A. No. 126 of 2022 and P.C. No. 04 of 2022.

2 A cao 619-2025.odt

2. These matters are clubbed. The Respondent seeks ₹3,00,000/- towards litigation expenses, citing that she, being a housewife with no income, requires to travel to Nagpur for hearings accompanied by her father.

3. The appellant contends that the Respondent's claim is misconceived, unprecedented, and legally untenable, intended to harass the Appellant and prolong proceedings. She has refused free legal aid, sought repeated adjournments, and already received ₹1,50,000/- from the Appellant (Cheque No. 292996 dated 18.03.2025).

4. On 21.07.2025, she submitted a "List of Expenses"

across the Bar, which is an afterthought, unsupported by receipts, vouchers, or affidavit, and grossly inflated. In absence of admissible proof, the figures are misleading and devoid of evidentiary value. The Appellant disputes all claims therein and prays for their complete rejection.

5. I have heard both the parties.

6. The respondent has submitted the list of expenses (litigation expenses) across the bar, however, it appears that, she has included many items for which she is not entitled under the heading of "litigation expenses". She is entitled for travelling expenses and other expenses in each visit from Yavatmal to Nagpur, so also, she is entitled for Court fees, expenses for purchase of stamp papers, online filing charges, copying charges, charges towards certified copies, typing charges and postal charges, however, she is 3 A cao 619-2025.odt not entitled for consultation fees, medical expenses under the heading of litigation expenses. So far as the travelling expenses are concerned, she has claimed Rs. 4,000/- per visit for 16 visits, however, it is not made clear that, when she was required to attend this Court for 16 times. She has also claimed Rs. 1,50,000/- towards unexpected expenses which may arise in future, however, the claim is exaggerated.

7. So far as the litigation expenses are concerned, the contention of the appellant is that, he has already paid the amount of Rs. 1,50,000/-, however, it is not towards the litigation expenses. Considering the heads and expenses given, it would be in the interest of justice and appropriate to grant Rs. 50,000/- towards litigation expenses. In fact, as the pleadings are completed, the matter may be taken up for final disposal, subject to payment of litigation costs/expenses.

8. Accordingly, we direct the appellant to pay the amount of Rs. 50,000/- towards litigation costs/expenses within a period of one month.

9. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.

(PRAVIN S. PATIL, J.) (SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J.) B.T.Khapekar Signed by: Mr. B.T. Khapekar Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 11/08/2025 17:20:42