Allowed

Mrs. Chitra Amol Patil v. Mrs. Amol Alias Devendra Ravindra Patil

Bombay HC1 Mar 2024WP/5607/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Wife challenged a Family Court interim maintenance order of Rs.40,000 per month granted only from the date of the order. The High Court quashed it, directed fresh hearing on Exhibits 10 and 21 in light of Rajnesh vs. Neha within three months, with the husband to continue paying Rs.40,000 monthly plus school fees meanwhile.

What did the court decide?

Impugned interim maintenance order dated 5 December 2022 quashed; Family Court to re-hear Exhibits 10 and 21 within three months; husband to continue paying Rs.40,000/month interim maintenance and dau

Mrs. Chitra Amol Patil Vs Mrs. Amol Alias Devendra… — Maintenance and Alimony | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

20-wp5607-23.doc

¶2

vai

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

VASANT ANANDRAO IDHOL

¶6

Digitally signed by VASANT ANANDRAO IDHOL Date:2024.03.05 WRIT PETITION NO.5607 OF 2023 18:41:11 +0530

¶7

Mrs.Chitra A. Patil ...Petitioner V/s. Amol @ Devendra R. Patil ...Respondent

¶8

Mr.Pramod Pawar for the Petitioner.

¶9

Ms.Rajeshree Phadke for the Respondent.

¶10

CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J. DATE : 1ST MARCH, 2024.

¶11

P.C. :-

¶12

This Writ Petition is filed by the Wife challenging the

¶13

order dated 5 December 2022 passed by the Family Court, Mumbai. By the impugned order, the Family Court, Mumbai has directed the Husband to pay a sum of Rs.40,000/- per month towards interim maintenance of the Respondent and two daughters from the date of the order. Further it was directed to pay the actual fees of the daughters directly.

¶14

1/4

¶15

20-wp5607-23.doc

¶16

Ms.Phadke appearing for the Respondent (Husband)

¶17

submits that as of today, the husband has complied with the directions given by the Family Court, Mumbai as regards payment of school fees and also as regards payment of interim maintenance.

¶18

Mr.Pawar appearing for the Petitioner (Wife) submits

¶19

that the present Writ Petition is filed on two counts i.e. (a) challenging the the quantum of interim maintenance granted and (b) the interim order grants interim maintenance from the date of the order, which is against the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the judgment in case of Rajnesh vs. Neha, (2021) 2 SCC 324. Ms.Phadke appearing for the Husband submits that the Family Court, Mumbai has passed the impugned order granting maintenance from the date of the order since before the impugned order could be passed, the Husband has already paid a sum of Rs.6,75,000/- periodically to the Wife, which the Court has considered. Therefore, the impugned order mentioned the above payment of interim maintenance from the date of the order.

¶20

2/4

¶21

20-wp5607-23.doc

¶22

I have heard both the counsel and also considered the

¶23

judgment of the Supreme Court in case of Rajnesh (supra), suffice would be the purpose if the present Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned order is quashed and set-aside.

¶24

The Writ Petition is allowed with following directions :-

¶25

(i). The impugned order dated 5 December 2022 passed by the Family Court, Mumbai in Common Order Below Exhibits 10 and 21 is quashed and set-aside.

¶26

(ii). The Family Court, Mumbai to re-hear the parties on Exhibits 10 and 21, by allowing the parties to file any documents to support their case in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in case of Rajnesh (supra). The said exercise of hearing and disposing of the Applications Exhibits 10 and 21 can be completed by the Family Court, Mumbai within the period of three months from today.

¶27

(iii). In view of the arrangement, the Husband, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of both the parties, should continue paying a sum of Rs.40,000/- per month towards

¶28

3/4

¶29

20-wp5607-23.doc

¶30

the interim maintenance for the Wife and two daughters. So also

¶31

he will also pay the actual schools fees of the daughters directly

¶32

or any amount which is required for the upbringing of the children.

¶33

The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶34

(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)

¶35

4/4

Mrs. Chitra Amol Patil v. Mrs. Amol Alias Devendra Ravindra Patil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs. Chitra Amol Patil v. Mrs. Amol Alias Devendra Ravindra Patil

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

Satish Jagannath Sharma Vs 1 Khemchand Khushaldas Rajpal Vaswani

Puneet Nitin Mehra Vs Avni Jasraj Mehra

Keyur Popatlal Gala Vs Nidhi Keyur Gala

Mr. Santosh Sabaji Malkar Vs Mrs. Sarika Santosh Malkar

Neha Sumeet Bal Vs Sumeet Shrikant Bal

Nilesh Shriram Sawant Vs Poonam Nilesh Sawant.