Bombay high court admits Rhea Pillai’s plea against sessions court order | mumbai news | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
May 30, 2017-Tuesday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

Bombay high court admits Rhea Pillai’s plea against sessions court order

Justice AM Badar, who was presiding over the matter, however, refused an interim relief in the form of an immediate stay on the ongoing proceedings in the family court, until her revision application is heard.

mumbai Updated: Nov 23, 2016 14:54 IST
HT Correspondent
Bombay high court
Pillai and Paes were in a bitter battle over maintenance and custody of their ten-year-old daughter.(Hindustan Times)

The Bombay high court (HC) on Tuesday admitted a revision application filed by former model Rhea Pillai seeking a review of a sessions court order on whether Pillai’s relationship with Paes can be considered on a par with that of his wife or not.

Justice AM Badar, who was presiding over the matter, however, refused an interim relief in the form of an immediate stay on the ongoing proceedings in the family court, until her revision application is heard.

Pillai, after her divorce from actor Sanjay Dutt, moved in with Paes and was in a live-in relationship with him until 2013. They then got into a bitter battle over maintenance and custody of their ten-year-old daughter. Paes has sought the sole custody of their daughter.

Pillai then filed a domestic violence case against Paes and his father and a magisterial court decided that although the pair wasn’t married, Pillai was living-in with Paes as his wife, and the case could therefore be heard by the court.

Paes however, challenged the order in a sessions court, which, in turn, ruled in his favour. Pillai then approached the HC.

Pillai, in her plea, argued the court had passed an interim order based on preliminary submissions, without getting into the merits of the case. She sought the court be asked to re-look into the case. She argued that at the time, both parties had decided to complete the framing of the preliminary issue within six months, but Paes had failed to keep his word.

Paes’ lawyer Abad Ponda however, opposed Pillai’s plea, holding no stay must be granted on the ongoing proceedings.