Disposed

Mrs. Suman Arun Kher v. Lt.Col.(Retd.) Arun Kumar Kher

Bombay HC22 Oct 2021WP/908/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court held that an order refusing maintenance required no interference as it was based on evidence. However, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the Family Court for interim maintenance guided by the Supreme Court judgment in Rajnesh vs. Neha.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to Petitioner to approach the Family Court for interim maintenance under the Rajnesh vs. Neha judgment.

Mrs. Suman Arun Kher Vs Lt.Col.(Retd.) Arun Kumar Kher — Maintenance and Alimony | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

22 wp-908-19.doc

¶2

BDP-SPS-TAC

¶3

BHARAT DASHARATH PANDIT

¶4

Digitally signed byBHARATDASHARATHPANDIT Date: 2021.10.2510:46:54 +0530

¶5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 908 OF 2019

¶6

Mrs Suman Arun Kher…. Petitioner.
V/s

¶7

Ltd. Col. (Retd). Arun Kumar Kher…. Respondent.

¶8

Ms. Seema Sarnaik a/w Ms. Sangeeta Salvi for the Petitioner.
Mr. Radhikesh U. Uttarwar a/w Mr. Shrikant Patil a/w Mr. Arjun
Pawar a/w Ms. Pooja Thakur for the Respondent.

¶9

 CORAM: NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

¶10

 DATE: OCTOBER 22, 2021

¶11

P.C.:-

¶12

1]After having heard respective learned Counsel for sometime, this
Court is of the view that order impugned in the Petition does not
warrant any interference, particularly when findings are based on
appreciation of evidence placed on record as regards nature of income
of Respondent-husband, quantum and also fact about Petitioner
having withdrawn herself from the company of Respondent-husband
and her independent source of income.

¶13

2]However, in my opinion, in the interest of justice, Petitioner can
be granted liberty to approach afresh in pending proceedings, seeking
interim maintenance based on judgment of the Apex Court in the
mater of Rajnesh vs. Neha and Another reported in (2021) 2 SCC 324.

¶14

1/2

¶15

22 wp-908-19.doc

¶16

3]In response to Court’s query, Counsel for the Petitioner Ms.
Seema Sarnaik submits that within four weeks from today, Petitioner
shall be filing application for grant of interim maintenance and in
response to which reply is informed to be filed by Respondent-husband
within four weeks thereafter. This Court expects the Family Court to
deal with such application, if so preferred by the Petitioner,
expeditiously and shall decide the same, in any case, within a period of
four months from the date of its presentation.

¶17

4]Family Court is required to be sensitive to the fact about giving
effect to the award of maintenance, if so ordered from a particular
date with supporting reasons. Needless to clarify that observations
made by the Family Court in the order impugned thereby refusing
maintenance shall not come in the way of the Petitioner in claiming
maintenance as permitted hereinabove, as such application has to be
decided on its own merits without being influenced by the said order.

¶18

5] With the above observations, Petition stands disposed of.

¶19

(NITIN W. SAMBRE, J. )

¶20

2/2

Mrs. Suman Arun Kher v. Lt.Col.(Retd.) Arun Kumar Kher

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs. Suman Arun Kher v. Lt.Col.(Retd.) Arun Kumar Kher

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sande Joseph Chukavu Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mumtaz Alam Anwrali Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ahomo Efe Helen and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Smt.Vatsalabai Baban Dhumal Vs Baban Jaywant Kad and Ors.

Nilesh Uttamchand Jain Vs Suchita Nilesh Jain

Jitendra Ramakant Yadav Vs the State of Maharashtra