A writ petition challenging a Trial Court's order granting interim maintenance. The Court held that the Learned Trial Court exercised discretion properly by considering inflation and the incoming estate under Sections 25 and 28, dismissing the challenge.
Writ Petition deemed devoid of merits and dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
rsk
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.2075 OF 2024
Sachin Shrimant Vhanmane and Anr. ...Petitioners Versus Saraswati Sidram Vhanmane ...Respondent
Mr. Anvil S. Kalekar for the Petitioners. Mr. Ajit V. Alange for the Respondent.
CORAM : SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J. DATE : 4th MARCH, 2024.
P. C. :
1
rsk 46-WP-2075-24.doc
created on Block No. 312 and 433/2. It is subsequently that in the year 2016 by virtue of the Will the estate of the deceased came into the hands of the petitioner. As no maintenance was being received, Regular Civil Suit No.883/2018 was filed claiming permanent maintenance. In this proceedings by way of Interim Application below Exhibit 5 interim maintenance of Rs.15,000/- was sought. The Trial Court by impugned order granted maintenance of Rs.7,500/- p.m. from the date of the order.
2
rsk 46-WP-2075-24.doc
submits that the findings of the Trial Court are bereft of the factors which are taken into consideration while granting interim maintenance. In support he relies upon the following decision in the case of Om Prakash Puri vs. Nandita Puri, 2014(6) Mh. L. J.
3
rsk 46-WP-2075-24.doc
been granted was sum of Rs.700/- p.m. Upon the death of the husband respondent had filed Regular Civil Suit No.883/2018 claiming maintenance of Rs.15,000/- from the petitioner as the estate of the deceased has came to their hands. Perusal of the pleadings indicate that the fact of the earlier charge being created has been mentioned. It is further pleaded that there is no source of income to the respondent and by the alleged Will the estate of the deceased has come into hands of the petitioner. It is also pleaded that petitioners are not paying maintenance to the respondent and as such sum of Rs.15,000/- is claimed as maintenance.
4
rsk 46-WP-2075-24.doc
virtue of the alleged Will.
5
rsk 46-WP-2075-24.doc
the Trial Court for taking a view that the rate of inflation being much higher than 1998, the amount of maintenance is not sufficient for sustenance of the respondent. Although sum of Rs.15,000/- was sought as maintenance, the Trial Court has granted amount of Rs.7,500/-. No fault can be found in the discretion which has been exercised based on the material which has come on record.
(SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J. )
6
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Trial Court erred in granting interim maintenance without expressly considering the factors under Section 23 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956.
Whether the change in circumstances regarding the estate of the deceased husband justified the alteration of maintenance amount under Section 25.
Whether the grant of Rs. 7,500/- was sustainable in light of the deceased's estate coming into the hands of the petitioner.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Om Prakash Puri vs. Nandita PuriReferred¶16
Om Prakash Puri vs. Nandita Puri, 2014(6) Mh. L. J. · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Sachin Shrimant Vhanmane and Anr.
Saraswati Sidram Vhanmane
SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
