Visahl Ajit Budhwani vs Sarah Vishal Budhwani
2021 Latest Caselaw 16121 Bom

                                                                         37. WP-6511-2021.doc

BDP-SPS-TAC




                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
  BHARAT
  DASHARATH
  PANDIT



                                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
  Digitally signed
  by BHARAT
  DASHARATH
  PANDIT
  Date: 2021.11.23



                                       WRIT PETITION NO. 6511 OF 2021
  11:52:54 +0530




                     VISAHL AJIT BUDHWANI                          ....Applicant.
                          V/s
                     SARAH VISHAL BUDHWANI                         .....Respondent

                     ----
                     Mr. Asadullah Shaikh a/w Farzeen Shaikh i/b AAK Legal for the
                     Applicant.

                     Mr. Digvijay Patil for the Respondent.
                     ----

                                       CORAM: NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

DATE: NOVEMBER 22, 2021

P.C.:-

1] The order impugned dated August 20, 2018 passed under

Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code awarding maintenance of

Rs 10,000/- to Respondent-wife and Rs 7,000/- to minor child is

questioned on the ground that income of the Petitioner-husband is

reduced from Rs 70,000/- to Rs 50,000/-. This Court is not required

to go into such challenge in view of remedy available to the Petitioner

under Section 127 of the Criminal Procedure Code under which

Petitioner always can approach the Family Court seeking modification/

37. WP-6511-2021.doc

reduction of payment of amount of maintenance. As far as challenge

on the issue of higher qualification of Respondent-wife and before

marriage she was gainfully employed is concerned, it is to be noted

that in 2018, the order of award of maintenance was passed which is

challenged before this Court after inordinate delay of about three

years. As such, aforesaid issue of Respondent's capacity to earn

independently need not be gone into at this stage.

2] However, it is made clear that Petitioner-husband shall be at

liberty to canvass the said issue at the time of award of final

maintenance based on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of

Bhushan Kumar Meen vs. Mansi Meen alias Harpreet Kaur reported in

(2010) 15 SCC 372.

3] In regard to challenge to directions issued against the Petitioner

vide order dated 10/2/2021 towards payment of EMI is concerned,

parties are in agreement that monthly EMI towards flat is Rs 15,000/-

per month. When the order of award of maintenance was passed, the

income of the Petitioner was of Rs 70,000/- which was taken into

account. As such, it is to be presumed that when the award of

37. WP-6511-2021.doc

maintenance of Rs 17,000/- was ordered, it was at the back of mind of

the court below i.e. Family Court that Petitioner had liability to pay

EMI of Rs 15,000/-. Merely because Respondent-wife alongwith

daughter born out of wedlock are staying in the said flat that by itself

will not give any right to the Petitioner-husband to question the

authority of the Court below under which directions are issued to the

Petitioner to pay the EMI. This Court expects the Petitioner to clear

the EMI as directed by the Family Court expeditiously.

4] Petition stands disposed of with the above liberty.

( NITIN W. SAMBRE, J. )