Bombay High Court
NITIN VISHWAS PATILversusLAXMI NITIN PATIL
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The appellate court found no infirmity in the Family Court’s maintenance order and dismissed the petition.
Summary
The petitioner challenged a Family Court order directing him to pay monthly maintenance of Rs.5,000 to his wife and Rs.7,000 to his 13‑year‑old son, arguing his income of Rs.30,000 plus rent of Rs.12,000 and that the wife has her own income. The respondent contended that the wife has no income, bears her own expenses, and the husband’s bank balance shows substantial funds, justifying the order. The High Court examined the evidence, including the husband’s earnings, rent receipt, and bank deposits, and noted the child’s schooling expenses. It held that the total of Rs.12,000 per month is modest but appropriate given the circumstances. Consequently, the Court found no infirmity in the Family Court’s decision and dismissed the writ petition, also disposing of pending applications.
Issues considered
- Whether the Family Court’s maintenance order of Rs.5,000 to the wife and Rs.7,000 to the minor child is justified in view of the husband’s income, rent receipt and bank balances.
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of higher earnings and the wife’s alleged independent income affect the liability to pay maintenance.
- Whether the impugned order is infirm or erroneous and liable to be set aside.
Subjects
- maintenance
- family law
- minor child
- appellate jurisdiction
- marital dispute
- financial capacity
Judgment
901-WP-15987-2025 (C).doc
N.S.Kamble
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 15987 OF 2025
Nitin Vishwas Patil ...Petitioner
VERSUS
Laxmi Nitin Patil ...Respondent
____________________________________________________________
Digitally signed
NILAM
by NILAM
SANTOSH
Mr.Veerdhawal Deshmukh i/b Mr.Ameyprasad Atigre, for the Petitioner.
SANTOSH KAMBLE Mr.Rohan Mahadik a/w Ms.Bharvi M. Samel, Ms.Upasana Pandey i/b The
KAMBLE Date:
2026.09.07
11:53:05 +0530 Juris Partners, for the Respondent.
____________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 3rd SEPTEMBER 2026
P.C. :
. The challenge in this Application is to the impugned order dated
18th September 2025, passed by the learned Family Court, Thane, whereby
the learned Judge has directed the Petitioner to pay Rs.5,000/- per month
maintenance to the Respondent-Wife and Rs.7,000/- per month towards the
maintenance to minor son, making a total amount of Rs.12,000/- per month.
2. It is contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the
Petitioner works as a workmen in Mira Motor Workshop and earns
Rs.30,000/- per month. The Respondent-Wife resides with the Petitioner.
The Petitioner owns one flat and Rs.12,000/- rent receives from the said flat.
The Respondent takes that rent and has sufficient source of income. The
Page 1 of 3
901-WP-15987-2025 (C).doc
N.S.Kamble
Respondent-wife earns more than the Petitioner. However, these facts have
not been considered by the learned Family Judge and has passed impugned
order which is erroneous and requested to allow the Application.
3. It is contention of the learned counsel for the Respondent that,
though wife stays with the Petitioner, but she bears her own expenses as
well as expenses of her son separately. She has no source of income. The
Petitioners bank account shows lakhs of rupees are laying in the bank
account. The Petitioner-husband receives rent of Rs.12,000/- in his bank
account and Respondent-wife does not get Rs.12,000/- rent. The learned
Judge has passed well reasoned order, no interference is required in it and
requested to dismiss the Petition.
4. I have heard both learned counsel. Perused impugned judgment
and order and the material produced on record.
5. While granting the maintenance, the learned Judge has observed
that the minor child is 13 years old and school going, requires additional
expenses such as transportation, tution fees, and other expenses amounting
to approximately Rs.10,000/- to Rs.12,000/-, apart from the school fees.
The bank statement of the Petitioner shows that around Rs.12,89,649/- was
deposited in the bank account of the Petitioner.
6. Considering the evidence on record, the learned Judge has
Page 2 of 3
901-WP-15987-2025 (C).doc
N.S.Kamble
granted an amount of Rs.5,000/- per month to the wife and Rs.7,000/- to
the minor son. I do not find infirmity in it.
7. In my view, an amount of Rs.12,000/- per month in the present
date is a meager amount towards the expenses of two persons particularly
when the minor son is school going. I do not find infirmity in the
impugned judgment and order, and I pass following order.
ORDER
(i) The Petition is dismissed.
(ii) All pending Applications are disposed of.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
Page 3 of 3
Checking your session…