Bombay High Court
SARIKA PANKAJ KADAM AND ANRversusPANKAJ BALASAHEB KADAM AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Family Court's order granting Rs.8,000 per month as maintenance to the minor daughter is quashed and replaced with an order directing the respondent to pay Rs.25,000 per month to the child.
Summary
The petitioners, Sarika Pankaj Kadam and her 11-year-old daughter, challenged a Family Court order that granted only Rs.8,000 per month as maintenance to the minor daughter and none to the mother. The petitioner argued that she earns a modest salary of Rs.61,000 per month, has rental income, and bears all educational and medical expenses of the child, while the respondent husband earns Rs.2,06,983 per month. The respondent contended that the petitioner’s income and assets were sufficient to meet her own and the child’s needs, and that the Family Court's order was well‑reasoned. The High Court examined the parties' incomes, liabilities, and the prevailing cost of living, finding the awarded amount grossly inadequate. It held that the Family Court erred in fixing a meager maintenance and therefore quashed the impugned order. The Court ordered the respondent to pay Rs.25,000 per month as maintenance to the minor daughter, effective from the date of the original order, and allowed the petition.
Issues considered
- Whether the maintenance of Rs.8,000 per month awarded to the minor daughter by the Family Court is adequate under the applicable law.
- Whether the petitioner mother is entitled to maintenance in addition to the child.
- Whether the Family Court erred in its assessment of the parties' incomes, liabilities, and the cost of living.
Subjects
- maintenance
- family court
- Section 125
- child support
- quash order
- inflation
- spousal maintenance
Judgment
7-WP-210-2026 (CR).doc
Shubhada S Kadam
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 210 OF 2026
Sarika Pankaj Kadam and anr. ...Petitioner/s
Versus
Pankaj Balasaheb Kadam and anr. ...Respondent/s
_________________________________________________________________
Mr. Dnyaneshwar Kale i/b. Ms. Nandini Chittal, Advocate for Petitioners.
Mr. Prathamesh Bhargude, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
Ms. Ranjana D. Humane, APP for Respondent-State.
_________________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 11th SEPTEMBER, 2026.
P.C. :
1. The challenge in this petition is to the impugned order dated
16th October, 2025 passed below Exhibit 43 in Petition A.No.860 of 2022
by learned Judge, Family Court No.6, Pune, whereby the learned Judge
granted maintenance of only ₹8,000/- per month to petitioner No.2(minor
daughter) of petitioner No.1 and did not award any maintenance to
petitioner No.1.
2. It is contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the
petitioner is residing with her 11-year-old daughter and had filed an
Digitally
application for maintenance. Respondent No.1 works in a software
signed by
SHUBHADA
SHUBHADA SHANKAR
SHANKAR KADAM
KADAM Date:
2026.09.12
company and earns a salary of more than ₹2,00,000/- per month. The
15:40:28
+0530
learned Judge did not consider this fact and awarded only ₹8,000/- per
Page 1 of 3
7-WP-210-2026 (CR).doc
Shubhada S Kadam
month as maintenance to the daughter without awarding any maintenance
to petitioner No.1. Petitioner No.1 has to bear the educational expenses of
her daughter, hence, requested to allow the petition.
3. It is contention of learned counsel for respondents that the
petitioner works as Deputy Manager in ICICI Bank and earns ₹61,000/-
per month. She has sufficient sources of income including rental income of
₹15,000/- per month from a house in her name and investments in mutual
funds. Respondent No.1 has his own financial liabilities. Learned Judge has
passed a well-reasoned order and no interference is required in it, and
requested to dismiss the petition.
4. I have heard both learned counsel, perused the impugned
judgment and order. Respondent No.1 works in an IT company and earns a
salary of ₹2,06,983/- per month. Though the petitioner is also working,
her salary is around ₹61,000/- per month. She is taking care of her
11-year-old daughter and is required to bear the educational expenses,
medical expenses, and other expenses of the daughter. The learned Judge
granted ₹8,000/- per month as maintenance to the daughter. In my view,
the said amount is on the lower side. Considering the present rate of
inflation and educational expenses, the amount of ₹8,000/- per month is
meager. In view of the above, I pass following order:
Page 2 of 3
7-WP-210-2026 (CR).doc
Shubhada S Kadam
ORDER
1. The petition is allowed.
2. The impugned order dated 16th October, 2025 passed below
Exhibit 43 in Petition A.No.860 of 2022 by learned Judge, Family
Court No.6, Pune, is quashed and set-aside.
3. Respondent No.1 shall pay ₹25,000/- per month as maintenance
to petitioner No. 2- the minor daughter, from the date of passing
of the order by the Family Court i.e. with effect from 16th
October 2025.
The petition is disposed of accordingly.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
Page 3 of 3
Checking your session…