Dinesh Babasabeh Tandale v. Sarika Dinesh Tandale

18-wp-1654-2026.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1654 OF 2026 Dinesh Babasaheb Tandale

...Petitioner

V/s.

Sarika Dinesh Tandale

...Respondent

Mr. Ganesh Bhujbal, Advocate for the Petitioner.

CORAM

:

N.R. BORKAR, J.

DATE :

15.04.2026.

P.C. :

1.

This petition takes exception to the order dated 04.10.2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Thane, below Exh. 37 in Marriage Petition No. 544 of 2021. 2.

By the order impugned, the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division has allowed the application filed by the respondent/wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act and directed the petitioner/husband to pay Rs.10,000/- per month to the respondent/wife towards interim maintenance for the respondent/wife herself, the son and the daughter. Pramod S.Lakare 1/2

18-wp-1654-2026.doc 3.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned trial Court has not considered the fact that the petitioner is doing the work of repairing footwear and earning hardly Rs.250 per day while awarding maintenance at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per month. It is submitted that the trial Court has also not considered the fact that respondent is doing tailoring work and earning about Rs.1,000/- to Rs. 1,500/- per day.

5.

I have perused the order impugned. The learned trial Court has observed that nothing is placed on record in respect of income of respondent/wife. The said finding is not shown to be perverse. As regards the quantum of maintenance granted by the trial Court, the same appears to be very reasonable. 6.

The petition is therefore dismissed.

[N.R.BORKAR, J.] Pramod S.Lakare 2/2