Partly allowed

Deepa Mahadev Shinde v. Mahadev Laxman Shinde

Bombay HC10 Mar 2011WP/5665/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Petition challenging Family Court maintenance order was filed. This Court enhanced maintenance to Rs.4,500 for petitioner and Rs.2,500 for minor daughter, effective from the date of Family Court order.

What did the court decide?

Impugned maintenance order modified; maintenance enhanced to Rs.4,500 for petitioner and Rs.2,500 for daughter payable from 23rd March 2010; arrears to be deposited.

Deepa Mahadev Shinde Vs Mahadev Laxman Shinde — Maintenance and Alimony | Bombay HC (2011)

WP5665.10.sxw

JPP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 5665 OF 2010

¶6

Mrs. Deepa Mahadev Shinde, ... Petitioner. V/s. Mr. Mahadev Laxman Shinde. ... Respondent.

¶7

Mr. V.N. Tayade for the Petitioner. Mr. B.G. Tangsali for the Respondent.

¶8

CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. DATED : 10^th MARCH 2011.

¶9

P.C. :-

¶10

The Petitioner herein filed Petition No.C-122 of 2008 in the Family Court at Bombay against the Respondent so as to have maintenance for herself and minor daughter born out of the wedlock between the Petitioner and Respondent. The learned Judge of the Family Court No.2 by her detailed order dated 23^rd March 2010 granted the Petitioner a sum of Rs. 4,000/- per month. Similarly, a sum of Rs.2,000/- per month was granted to the minor daughter. This order dated 23^rd March 2010 was to take effect from the date of the order itself. The costs of Rs.1,000/- has been awarded. The Petitioner – wife has challenged this order by way of Writ Petition.

¶11

Rule is issued. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent waives service. By consent, taken up for hearing.

¶12

WP5665.10.sxw

¶13

¶14

The Respondent is working in Railway and the Respondent has produced salary slips and his take home salary is in the vicinity of Rs.15,000/-, Rs.20,000/- or so. I have noticed various deductions and it is noticed that the Respondent is depositing every month a sum of Rs.5,000/- by way of voluntary Provident Fund. His other deductions are reasonable. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that looking to the take home salary of the Respondent as also after considering other income which he would have such as income from interest on his investments, particulars of which are not mentioned anywhere in the record. It would be proper if the order is set aside so as to grant some more maintenance. Learned Counsel for the Respondent contended that the quantum of maintenance is properly arrived at.

¶15

After having considered the pay slips and other material and after having noticed that the Respondent is staying away from the Petitioner and has to take care of a minor girl, it would be proper if the maintenance amount is enhanced. Keeping in view the monthly income as well as the other assets, it would be proper if the Respondent – wife is awarded a maintenance of Rs.4,500/- per month and the daughter is awarded maintenance of Rs.2,500/- per month. In my view as of today, these amounts would be sufficient to take care of the Respondent as well as her daughter.

¶16

WP5665.10.sxw

¶17

¶18

In view of above, following order is passed :-

¶19

(i) The Writ Petition is partly allowed.

¶20

(ii) Order dated 23^rd March 2010 is modified and it is hereby ordered that the Respondent shall pay to the Petitioner a sum of Rs.4,500/- per month for her maintenance and he shall equally pay a sum of Rs. 2,500/- for the maintenance of minor daughter. This enhanced amount shall be payable from 23^rd March 2010 i.e. the date of the order passed by the learned Trial Judge. The Respondent shall pay the maintenance for the month of April 2011 at the enhanced rate and arrears up to March 2011 shall be deposited in the Family Court on or before 15^th June 2011. As and when the amount is deposited, the Petitioner would be able to withdraw it without security or guarantee.

¶21

(iii) The Petitioner shall communicate to the Respondent the Bank Account in which the maintenance amount for the Petitioner and the daughter is to be deposited. The Respondent shall arrange to deposit the said amount of maintenance in the said Bank Account so the record would be immediately available to the parties.

¶22

(R.Y. GANOO, J.)

Deepa Mahadev Shinde v. Mahadev Laxman Shinde

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepa Mahadev Shinde v. Mahadev Laxman Shinde

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hafiza Mohammed Shaikh Vs Mukhtar Chand Shaikh

Sudhir Vitthalrao Shinde Vs Prerna Sudhir Shinde and Anr.

Akhtar Ismail Khan Vs Begum Zamrrud Akhtar Khan and Anr.

Tushar Digambar Parulekar Vs Sonal Dohsi ( Advocate and Solicitor)

1. Shashipal Shankar and Ors. Vs 1. Shirin Cawasji Vazifdar and Anr.

Revathi Ramakrishnan Vs 1. Saguna Karunakaran and Anr.