Dr. Akshay Arun Ranade vs Sarika Akshay Ranade on 29 June, 2021
21 Similarly, the decision in Smt.Amishi Milan
Honawar's case (supra) was in relation to an interim injunction
order restraining the wife from preventing the respondent-
husband and other members of his family in having access, use
::: Uploaded on - 30/06/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 01/07/2021 01:11:02 :::
KVM
25/42
16 - RPM 2 OF 2021.doc
and utilisation of the Flat No.B-13 in the proceedings for divorce
pending before the Family Court. The Division Bench of this
Court in the above premise held that the impugned order had
been passed during the pendency of the proceedings and cannot
have existence or enforceability after the disposal of the main
proceedings unless it is specifically protected by the Family Court
at the time of the disposal of the main proceedings. Being so, the
impugned order is an interlocutory order and, therefore, is not
appealable under Section 19(1) of the Family Court Act.
22 Reverting to the facts of the case in hand,
unquestionably the impugned orders had been passed on various
applications referred hereinabove during the pendency of the
proceedings for restitution of conjugal rights at the instance of
respondent-husband. This petition ultimately came to be
dismissed by the learned Judge of the Family Court on 16 th
December 2016. Admittedly, the impugned orders were not
assailed or challenged anytime by the appellant-wife herein
during the subsistence of the proceedings for restitution of
conjugal rights.