Bombay High Court
DEVIDAS SHANKAR MOREversusMANGAL DEVIDAS MORE
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- SHIVKUMAR DIGE
Holding
The appellate court dismissed the petition, holding that the maintenance amount of Rs.10,000 per month was not excessive given the petitioner's pension.
Summary
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging a Family Court order that granted the respondent Rs.10,000 per month as maintenance. The petitioner, a retired assistant section officer drawing a pension of Rs.23,750, contended that the amount was excessive and left him with insufficient funds for his own expenses. The respondent argued that she had no source of income and the awarded amount was inadequate for her livelihood. The High Court examined the pension details and the facts of the case, concluding that the maintenance amount was not excessive in the circumstances. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition and ordered the petitioner to deposit the arrears of maintenance within two weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether the Family Court erred in fixing maintenance at Rs.10,000 per month despite the petitioner's pension of Rs.23,750
- Whether the petition seeking dismissal of the maintenance order should be allowed
Subjects
- maintenance
- family court
- pension
- arrears
- civil appellate jurisdiction
- writ petition
- dismissal
Judgment
902-WP-47-2026 (C) VD (2) c.doc
Rohit Ghuge
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 47 OF 2026
Devidas Shankar More
VERSUS
Mangal Devidas More
_________________________________________________________________
Ms. Prashita Mamodia i/b R. V. Sankpal & Associates, Advocate for
Petitioner.
Ms. Sneha G. Sanap, Appointed Advocate for Respondent through Legal
Aid.
_________________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 02nd JULY, 2026.
P.C. :
1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for
Respondent.
2. The challenge in this petition is to the impugned order dated
29.08.2025 passed below Exhibit 12 by the learned Judge, 6 th Family
Court, Mumbai granting maintenance amount of Rs.10,000/- to the
Respondent.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for the Petitioner that the
Petitioner is retired from service and is drawing a pension of Rs.23,000/-
per month. He needs the said amount for his own expenses, but this fact
has not been considered by the learned Family Court, which has granted
maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month to the Respondent, which is on the
higher side, and requested to allow the Petition.
Page 1 of 2
902-WP-47-2026 (C) VD (2) c.doc
Rohit Ghuge
4. It is contention of learned counsel for the Respondent that the
Respondent has no source of income and amount of Rs.10,000/- is an
inadequate amount for the Respondent to maintain herself. The Petitioner
has received a handsome amount upon his retirement. He has not
deposited the arrears of the maintenance amount till date and requested to
dismiss the Petition.
5. I have heard both learned counsel. Perused impugned order.
6. The petitioner was working as an Assistant Section Officer and
retired on 31st May 2025. He is drawing a pension of Rs. 23,750/-per
month. The Petitioner has received a handsome amount after his
retirement. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
Rs. 10,000/-maintenance amount awarded by the learned Family Court is
not on the higher side. Considering these facts, I pass following order.
ORDER
i) The Petition is dismissed.
ii) The Petitioner shall deposit the arrears of maintenance amount
before the Family court within two weeks from the date of
passing of this order.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
Page 2 of 2
Checking your session…