RAJNI PRAVIN KUMAR SHETEversusPRAVIN KUMAR JANARDHAN SHETE AND ANR.

                          1/10                      4 IA.3958.2025...odt

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
               CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

            INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3958 OF 2025
                            IN
             FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 54 OF 2023

Rajni Pravin Kumar Shete

Age:41 years, Occ: Service,
Presently R/at: Sarathi Sankalp, Near
Pinnac, Kanchan Ganga, Dhole Patil
Road, Aundh, Pune - 411 007
Permanently R/at: 3262, Apartment
'A', Normandy Woods, Dr. Ellicott City,
Maryland-21041                             ..   Applicant
      Versus

Mr. Pravin Kumar Janardan Shete

Age: 46 years, Occ: Service,
R/at
1) Flat No. 03, Building No. D/3, 1st
>oor, S. No. 103-A/3B/103B/2, Shiv
Shrushti Apartment, S.B. Road,
Pune- 4111016
2) 104, Sarathi Sankalp, Near
Pinnac, Kanchan Ganga, Dhole Patil
Road, Aundh, Pune 411 007             .. Respondent
                              …
Ms. Medha Jondhale a/w Mr. Anand Jondhale and Rajnandini
Jondhale, for the Applicant.
Mr. Abhijit Sarwate, for the Respondent.
                               …

                  CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE &
                         MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ.

                  DATED: 17th JULY, 2026


Rushikesh
                           2/10                  4 IA.3958.2025...odt

Order : [Per Manjusha Deshpande, J.]:


1.     The Interim Application has been Fled by the Applicant

seeking directions to the Respondent to pay Rs. 1 lakh per

month, towards the interim maintenance to the Applicant,

pending the hearing and Fnal disposal of the Family Court

Appeal.

2.     The Applicant is the Appellant in the Appeal, which is

pending adjudication before this Court. The Appeal has been

Fled by the Appellant-wife against the judgment and decree

granted by the Family Court No. 5, Pune, in Divorce Petition

P.A. No. 988/2018 for divorce, permanent alimony and

custody, which was decided by the Judgment and Order dated

21.03.2023, partially allowing the petition, granting divorce

and dissolving the marriage between the Appellant and the

Respondent under Section 13(1)(i-a)(i-b) of the Hindu

Marriage Act, 1955. The custody of the elder son Tanmay, was

to remain with the respondent-husband, whereas the custody

of younger son Parth was to remain with the petitioner-wife.

Costs of Rs.25,000/- were awarded to the petitioner-wife to be

borne by the respondent-husband towards litigation cost.

       Being aggrieved by the refusal of the permanent alimony,

the Appellant-wife has approached this Court. During the
Rushikesh
                               3/10                 4 IA.3958.2025...odt

pendency of the Appeal, the present Interim Application has

been        moved   by   the    Applicant-wife   seeking     interim

maintenance pending the Appeal.

3.     The Application has been Fled by the Applicant on the

ground that, the Respondent-husband has willfully neglected

to provide any Fnancial support to the Applicant, which is his

bounden duty. The lifestyle enjoyed during the marriage is a

crucial factor. The Applicant's income is insufFcient to

maintain a similar standard of living post-separation. It is the

obligation of the Respondent-husband to bear the Fnancial

burden of child care, education, medical expenses, etc.

       The learned counsel for the Applicant-wife submits that,

the Respondent-husband owns multiple properties on prime

locations, on the other hand, the Applicant is struggling to

make ends meet and is residing in a rented 1BHK apartment

and managing all the expenses related to raising the child.

The Applicant is residing in the United States (U.S.), whereas

the Respondent-husband resides in India. The income of the

Applicant is totally insufFcient to maintain herself, more

particularly, with the H1B visa limitations, managing the

transition of F1 visas and the associated college expenses of

their son around USD 60,000 per year for the education of

Rushikesh
                           4/10                   4 IA.3958.2025...odt

their elder son, who is studying in Australia.

       It is submitted that, although the Applicant is employed,

her current work project was stated to be ending in June 2025

and, therefore, there is an uncertainty as to how she would be

managing her rent and the daily expenses, without any

additional support, hence, she is making a prayer to grant her

interim maintenance. It is further submitted that the

Applicant's parents are not in a position to support her since

they have already retired and are surviving on pension. It is

submitted that the Respondent is enjoying a lavish lifestyle.

He has various properties, including three houses at Pune, 1

house at Vita, 3 shops in the heart of the city at Pune, and a

car.    His salary as on 25.09.2015 was Rs.1,150,002/- per

annum.      Reliance is placed on the salary slip of the

Respondent, which discloses his income.

4.     The learned counsel for the Applicant submits that, there

is a series of judicial pronouncements which make the husband

legally liable to pay maintenance to the wife even if the wife is

earning. It is the primary responsibility of the husband to

maintain his wife and children. The present Respondent-

husband is an able-bodied man, leading a luxurious life,

therefore he has capacity to maintain the Applicant and their

Rushikesh
                            5/10                   4 IA.3958.2025...odt

son.

       It is submitted that, in order to make a wife eligible for

maintenance, it is not necessary that a wife should be destitute

without any income. Therefore it is prayed that, the prayer

made by the Applicant to grant her interim maintenance of

Rs.1,00,000/- deserves to be allowed.

5.     The Respondent-husband has Fled an afFdavit in reply to

the Interim Application. Mr. Sarwate, learned counsel for the

Respondent submitted that the Appeal Fled by the Appellant

itself is assailing the order of refusal to grant maintenance;

therefore, the same relief cannot be claimed by the Applicant

by way of interim relief. So far as the merits of the Application

is concerned, the learned counsel submits that the Applicant is

gainfully employed in the United States of America (U.S.A.) for

several years; i.e. since 2011, and is Fnancially independent.

The reliance placed on the salary slips produced with the

Application indicate that, she is employed with Mark Infotech

Inc., New Jersey, drawing a gross monthly salary of USD

8,700/- and a net monthly salary of USD 6,149.60/-. It is

submitted that, despite seeking interim maintenance on the

ground of Fnancial hardship, the Applicant has failed to

disclose her complete and current Fnancial particulars,

Rushikesh
                           6/10                   4 IA.3958.2025...odt

including her overall remuneration and earnings.                Her

Fnancial capacity has already been examined by the Family

Court while deciding her application under Sections 24 and 26

of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The order of the Family

Court has recorded that the Applicant was earning an annual

income of USD 1,12,926.78 for the year 2017, and USD

1,09,606.78 for the year 2018. Thus, according to the

observation of the Family Court, the Applicant was earning

substantially more than the Respondent. He relies on the

salary slip of the Applicant for the month of February 2019,

which has come on record.

       Our attention is further drawn to the observations of the

Family Court while deciding the Exhibit-5 Application of the

Applicant, wherein the Family Court has observed that, the

salary slip of the Applicant for the month of February - March

2019, with her IT returns show that, she was earning USD

1,12,926.78 per annum. In the year 2019, she was earning

USD 3085 for two weeks; i.e. for half month. This itself

indicates that, she was earning more than sufFcient income to

maintain herself. The interim application Fled by the

Applicant-wife has been rejected by the Family Court, which

has not been assailed by her, therefore, even the present

Rushikesh
                           7/10                  4 IA.3958.2025...odt

Interim Application does not deserve any consideration.

6.     It is submitted that, before the trial court the parties

were directed to Fle their respective afFdavits of earnings and

liabilities. Though the Respondent has Fled his afFdavit, the

Applicant has not Fled her afFdavit. According to the order

passed by the Family Court while dissolving their marriage,

the custody of the elder son Tanmay was given to the husband,

and he is taking care of all the expenses of his son; thus,

according to him, it is just and proper that the Applicant-wife

who is equally capable of earning, should take care of their

other son Parth, who has been given in her custody.

       It is further submitted that the Respondent is looking

after the expenses of the elder son, who is presently pursuing

his education in Australia. Apart from the expenses of the

elder son, his elderly parents are also dependent on him, who

were compelled to opt for voluntary retirement due to health

issues. So far as the properties in the name of the family is

concerned, according to the Respondent, those properties

stand in the name of his father and brother, who have let out

those premises. In fact, one shop is already vacated and two

shops were on the way of being vacated. According to him, he

is the only principal earning member of his family, and

Rushikesh
                           8/10                   4 IA.3958.2025...odt

considering the responsibility of his parents; he does not have

any spare income to support the Applicant, who is more than

capable of taking care of her needs. There is also an averment

made in the afFdavit Fled on 14.06.2025, that he is basically

having non-technical background with a basic course of SAP.

Due to increasing competition and automation brought by A.I.,

he is currently employed in IT sector; however, he is in

constant fear of losing his job at any moment. It is stated that,

after the divorce, he has moved on in his life and married on

14.07.2024; therefore, he has an additional responsibility of

his second wife, hence, on that ground also the Application

Fled by the Applicant does not deserve any consideration.

7.     After hearing the rival submissions and going through

the papers, we Fnd that the Applicant is residing in United

States of America since 2011, and she has disclosed her

earnings during the Family Court proceedings as well as in the

present Interim Application. The present Application has been

veriFed before the notary public in Maryland, USA. The salary

slips placed on record re>ect her continued employment.

Presently, she is employed with Mark Infotech Inc, New Jersey,

and is earning gross monthly salary of USD 8,700, which is

re>ected from the Earning CertiFcation for the period

Rushikesh
                           9/10                   4 IA.3958.2025...odt

01.01.2026 ending 01.31.2026, and the net pay of USD

6186.60. She is holding professional qualiFcations of BCA,

MCA, PMP and SAFe CertiFcations.

       Although she has stated that there is no disposable

surplus income due to various expenses which are required to

be incurred by her, we do not Fnd any favour in her reason for

claiming interim maintenance from the Respondent-husband.

Her only excuse is that she is living under extreme Fnancial

strain due to exorbitant cost of living abroad.

8.     In our view, this cannot be a ground for claiming interim

maintenance during the pendency of the Family Court Appeal.

The Applicant is a qualiFed professional, residing abroad since

last 15 years, who has brought up two children single-

handedly. Even presently, she has more than sufFcient income

at her disposal, which is proved from the documents placed on

record by the Applicant herself. The Applicant has been

refused permanent alimony by the Family Court, which is the

subject matter of the Appeal pending before this Court. By

way of this Interim Application, the Applicant is seeking

interim maintenance. Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act,

1955 contemplates grant of interim maintenance, pending the

matrimonial proceedings. The Section itself contemplates that

Rushikesh
                                                 10/10                   4
                       IA.3958.2025...odt
                       if the Respondent, be it wife or husband has no independent,

                       sufFcient means for his or her support and the necessary

                       expenses of the proceedings, the respondent shall pay to the

                       petitioner the expenses of proceedings and monthly expenses

                       of such sum having regard to petitioner’s own income and

                       income of respondent. The very object of Section 24 is that,

                       the Fnancially weaker party should be able to defend the

                       proceedings ably and is not left in a vulnerable Fnancial

                       position throughout the proceedings.

                       9.      In view of the scope of Section 24, in our view, the

                       Applicant has failed to make out a case for grant of her prayer

                       in the Application. Hence, the Interim Application seeking

                       interim maintenance is rejected.




                       (MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.)               (BHARATI DANGRE, J.)



          Digitally
          signed by
          RUSHIKESH
RUSHIKESH VISHNU
VISHNU    PATIL
PATIL     Date:
          2026.07.18
          19:44:24
          +0530




                       Rushikesh