Disposed

Anchal Bansal v. Abhishek Bansal

Delhi HC9 Oct 2025MAT.APP.(F.C.)/2/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against a Family Court maintenance order under Section 24, Hindu Marriage Act. The High Court held that the Family Court erred by fixing maintenance at Rs. 40,000 per month without considering the husband's income and assets disclosed in his affidavit. The order was set aside and the application remanded for fresh decision.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 18.10.2024 set aside; Family Court to decide Section 24 application afresh after considering parties' affidavits.

Anchal Bansal Vs Abhishek Bansal — Maintenance and Alimony | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~82

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- MAT.APP.(F.C.) 2/2025 & CAV 9/2025

¶4

ANCHAL BANSAL .....Appellant Through: Mr. Prag Chawla and Mr. Sudeep Sudan, Advs. with Appellant in person

¶5

versus

¶6

ABHISHEK BANSAL .....Respondent Through: Mr. Mayank Arora and Mr. Jai Allagh, Advs. with Respondent in person

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

¶9

O R D E R % 09.10.2025

¶10

A perusal of record reflects that both the have parties filed their respective affidavits disclosing their income, assets and liabilities. However, the Family Court without taking into consideration the income of the Respondent/Husband has proceeded to direct him to pay Rs. 40,000/- per month to the Appellant/Wife.

¶11

We have heard learned counsel representing the parties at length.

¶12

Learned counsel representing the Appellant/Wife has drawn the attention of this Court to the various facts including payment of Rs. 2,61,28,236/- by the Respondent to DLF towards advance for purchase of immovable property during the year 2024 and the details of his assets as disclosed in his affidavit.

¶13

The Family Court is required to consider all these aspects while

¶14

This is a digitally signed order.

¶15

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/10/2025 at 13:02:59

¶16

assessing the amount of maintenance. It is evident that the Family Court has proceeded to assess the expenses of the parties while assessing the amount of maintenance.

¶17

In such circumstances, this Court is left with no choice but to set-aside the order dated 18.10.2024 and request the Family Court to decide afresh the application filed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, after considering all aspects of the matter including the affidavits filed by the parties.

¶18

In view of the above, the present Appeal, along with pending application, is disposed of.

¶19

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

¶20

HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J. OCTOBER 09, 2025 /sp/hr

¶21

This is a digitally signed order.

¶22

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/10/2025 at 13:02:59

Anchal Bansal v. Abhishek Bansal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anchal Bansal v. Abhishek Bansal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Archana Chandra Vs Tarun Chandra

Karuna Nath Vs Dipender Nath

Ms. Anupama Sharma Vs Shri Sanjay Sharma

Nitin Chopra Vs Geeta Vohra

Mahima Kore Vs Amit Kore

Yatish Malik Vs Chesta Ganotra

Smita Jina Vs Amit Kumar Jina

Sagar Faujdar Vs Shailja Yadav

Ramesh Sharma Vs Government of N.C.T. of Delhi & Ors.

Shashi Khanna Vs Suresh Kapoor through Lrs Mrs Veena Suresh Kapoor & Ors.

Mandeep Singh and Anr. Vs Authum Investment and Infrastructure Ltd.

Nishant Muttreja Vs Surya Jyoti Software Private Limited (through Its Director) & Ors.

Rita Gulhati (Since Deceased) Tht Lrs Vs Anil Prakash & Ors.

Earthz Urban Spaces Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ravinder Munshi & Ors.