Sneha Govind Kondawar And Another v. Govind Gangaram Kondawar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 61 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1739 OF 2024 SNEHA GOVIND KONDAWAR AND ANOTHER

VERSUS

GOVIND GANGARAM KONDAWAR ...

Advocate for the Petitioners : Mr. Kshitij Hemant Surve and Mr. Hemant Surve ...

CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT, J.

DATE : 17.07.2025.

PER COURT :

1.

Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioners. 2.

Inspite of specific order none present for the respondent. 3.

The wife and daughter of respondent have approached this Court seeking modification of the order by enhancing the amount of maintenance granted by the learned Judge Family Court, Aurangabad by order dated 18.06.2024. The petitioner/wife had filed an application below Exh. 5, praying to pay interim maintenance @ Rs. 5,000/- per month to each applicants from the date of application. It is the case of the petitioner wife that the husband is earning around Rs. 70,000/- p.m. and inspite of directions for producing statement of his assets and liabilities, he has avoided to

produce the same on record.

4.

Considering the income of the husband as Rs. 17,000/- p.m., the Court ought to have granted maintenance amount of Rs. 23,000/- i.e. 1/3rd of the salary and instead of 1/3rd the Court has granted very meager amount. The Court ought to have considered that the daughter is now studying and she requires amount even for her School fees and Schooling expenses.

5.

Learned trial Court has considered that as per statement of assets and liabilities and even the wife is earning amount of Rs. 41,500/- p.m. and husband is earning Rs. 70,000/- p.m. In that view the trial Court has passed the impugned order. 6.

Learned Advocate for the petitioners vehemently submits that the conduct of the husband ought to have been seen that inspite an order directing to produce salary slips from March, 2023 to May2023, by order dated 25.08.2023, the husband has not produced the same on record. At least looking to the conduct of the respondent/husband the Court ought to have granted more amount. The order under challenge is an interim order. Nothing is on record to show that the order is totally perverse and illegal or even unreasonable. This Court finds that difference in amount of income

per month is around Rs. 30,000/-, the Court has, therefore, granted Rs. 5,000/- and Rs. 5,000/-, to petitioner No. 1 & No. 2 respectively i.e. Rs. 10,000/- p.m. This Court does not hold the said amount to be unreasonable calling for any interference at the hands of this Court.

7.

Considering above, this Court does not find any necessity to call for any interference in the impugned order. The Writ Petition, therefore, is dismissed. No order as to the costs. 8.

Since the petition before the Family Court is pending since 2021, the learned Family Court Judge is requested to dispose off the proceeding as early as possible and preferably within a period of one year from today.

( KISHORE C. SANT ) JUDGE mahajansb/