Bombay High Court
GANESH TUKARAM WAGHMAREversusMINA ALIAS RANI GANESH WAGHMARE
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The High Court held that the suspension of the petitioner from service does not warrant setting aside the Family Court's interim maintenance order and dismissed the writ petition.
Summary
The petitioner, Ganesh Tukaram Waghmare, challenged an interim maintenance order of Rs.4,000 per month granted by the Family Court, Jalgaon, on the ground that he had been suspended from his Zilla Parishad job and was unemployed. He argued that he could not afford the payment, had to support his aged mother, and that his wife had deserted him, so there was no refusal to maintain her. The respondent wife contended that she had no income, was wholly dependent on the petitioner, and produced a salary certificate showing his earnings of about Rs.23,857 per month. The High Court observed that the suspension did not automatically invalidate the maintenance order and that the amount, though modest, was reasonable. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, leaving the interim maintenance order in force.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner's suspension from service justifies setting aside the interim maintenance order.
- Whether the amount of Rs.4,000 per month is adequate as interim maintenance under the circumstances.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- interim maintenance
- suspension from service
- Family Court
- Hindu Marriage Act
- writ petition
- dependency
- maintenance order
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:5457
1 WP 8806-2023.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 8806 OF 2023
GANESH TUKARAM WAGHMARE
VERSUS
MINA ALIAS RANI GANESH WAGHMARE
…
Mr. Sandesh R. Patil – Advocate for Petitioner
Ms. Manjushree V. Narwade – Advocate for Respondent (appointed)
…
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE : 02.02.2026
ORDER:
1. Heard learned Counsel for the respective parties.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 03.04.2023 passed
below Exhibit-7 by the learned Judge, Family Court, Jalgaon, in Petition
No. C–02 of 2022, whereby the learned Judge partly allowed the
application and directed the petitioner-husband to pay interim
maintenance of Rs.4,000/- per month to the respondent-wife from the
date of the petition.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. S.R. Patil, submits that the
petitioner-husband was in service with Zilla Parishad, however, he has
been suspended from service and is presently jobless and not receiving
any salary. It is further submitted that the petitioner has to maintain his
2 WP 8806-2023.odt
aged mother, has no independent residential house and is residing in
rented premises. It is contended that the respondent-wife has willfully
deserted the petitioner and, therefore, there is no refusal on the part of
the petitioner-husband to maintain her. On these grounds, it is urged that
the impugned order passed by the Judge, Family Court, Jalgaon, deserves
to be set aside.
4. Per contra, learned Counsel for the respondent-wife, Ms. M.V.
Narwade, supports the impugned order and submits that the learned
Judge, Family Court, Jalgaon, has passed a reasonable and justified order.
It is submitted that the respondent-wife has no source of income, whereas
the petitioner-husband is serving with the Zilla Parishad and is earning a
salary of about Rs.25,000/- per month. It is further submitted that the
mother of the petitioner is a pensioner and is not dependent upon him
and that the respondent-wife is only dependent upon the petitioner-
husband.
5. Having perused the impugned order passed by the learned Judge,
Family Court, Jalgaon, it is evident that there is no dispute regarding the
marital relationship between the parties and that a petition under the
Hindu Marriage Act is pending before the Family Court, Jalgaon. In the
application for interim maintenance, the respondent-wife specifically
contended that the petitioner-husband was in service with the Zilla
Parishad. At the relevant time, the respondent-wife placed on record the
3 WP 8806-2023.odt
salary certificate of the petitioner, which indicates that he was drawing a
net salary of Rs.23,857/- per month, as well as the pension certificate of
the petitioner’s mother.
6. Merely on the ground that the petitioner-husband has been
suspended from service with the Zilla Parishad, the impugned order
cannot be set aside. Furthermore, the amount of Rs.4,000/- per month
granted towards interim maintenance is, in fact, a meagre amount.
Considering these aspects, I am not inclined to entertain the present
petition.
7. Hence, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. There shall no order as
to costs.
8. Pending Civil Applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
9. The fees in sum of Rs.6,000/- (rupees Six Thousand only) shall be
quantified to the learned Counsel, Ms. Manjushree V. Narwade, appointed
to represent the respondent.
[ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ]
JUDGE
Pooja Kale/
Checking your session…