Bombay High Court
KAVITA AGARWALversusSANJEEV KUMAR AGARWAL
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The High Court quashed the Family Court's interim maintenance order for being unsupported by specific reasons and remanded the matter for fresh hearing.
Summary
The Bombay High Court heard two writ petitions concerning interim maintenance in a matrimonial dispute between Sanjeev Kumar Agarwal and Kavita Agarwal. The petitioner in WP 7875 challenged a Family Court order that granted Rs.1,00,000 as interim maintenance without providing reasons and despite the husband's failure to produce income tax returns. The respondent in WP 10008 sought dismissal of the petition, arguing the Family Court order was well‑reasoned. The Court found the Family Court order to be based on assumptions and lacking specific justification, and therefore quashed it, remanding the matter for a fresh hearing. It directed the Family Court to decide the interim maintenance application on its merits and disposed of both writ petitions.
Issues considered
- What is the validity of a Family Court order granting interim maintenance without specific reasons and without considering the husband's tax returns?
- Whether the High Court can quash and remand the Family Court's interim maintenance order?
Subjects
- interim maintenance
- family court
- quash order
- high court
- remand
- maintenance proceedings
- tax returns
- jurisdiction
Judgment
6-WP-7875-2026 (C).doc
Tikam
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 7875 OF 2026
Sanjeev Kumar Agarwal ...Petitioner/s
Versus
Kavita Agarwal ...Respondent/s
VAISHALI
ANIL With
TIKAM WRIT PETITION NO. 10008 OF 2026
Kavita Agarwal ...Petitioner/s
Versus
Digitally signed
by VAISHALI
ANIL TIKAM
Date:
2026.08.29
Sanjeev Kumar Agarwal ...Respondent/s
10:18:04
+0530
_________________________________________________________________
Mr. Hitesh Vyas a/w. Rasik Raut, Advocates for Petitioner in WP 7875 of
2026 and Respondent in WP 10008 of 2026
Mr. Yash CP Vyas a/w. Ms. Sejal Patel a/w. Ishita Shah, Advocates for
Petitioner in WP 10008 of 2026
_________________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 21st AUGUST, 2026.
P.C. :
1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and Respondent of
respective writ petitions.
2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner (in WP 7875 of 2026)
submits that while passing order, Learned Judge has observed that
Respondent-wife is capable to get interest from sale proceeds of land,
amount already received from husband, her own business, around
Rs.2,50,000/- and without giving any reason only mentioned that the
Petitioner has around 8 cars, wife has no car. Hence, Rs.1,00,000/-
granted towards interim maintenance, which is without any reason and
Page 1 of 2
6-WP-7875-2026 (C).doc
Tikam
requested to remand the matter.
3. Learned counsel for the Respondent-wife submits that the
Learned Judge has passed well reasoned order and no interference is
required any and requested to dismiss the petition.
4. I have heard both learned counsel. Perused the impugned order.
While passing the order, Learned Judge has observed that the Petitioner
has not produced income tax returns for the year 2024-25. While granting
maintenance of Rs.1,00,000/-, the Learned Judge has not given any
specific reason and mere only on assumption impugned order has been
passed, hence I find it fit case to remand the matter and I pass following
order:
ORDER
(i) Petitions are partly allowed.
(ii) The impugned order dated 18/04/206 passed by the Learned
Family Court, Pune is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back
to the Learned Family Court for fresh hearing.
(iii) The Learned Judge shall decide the interim maintenance
application of Respondent on its own merit, as early as possible.
(iv) Contentions of both the parties are kept open.
(v) Both Petitions are disposed of.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
Page 2 of 2
Checking your session…