[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/4 vs Shri Pandeswara Madhusudhan on 10 February, 2026
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010041212025
2026:GAU-AS:1787
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : CRP(IO)/60/2025
SMT PRIYANKA CHOUDHURY
W/O SHRI. PANDESWARA MADHUSUDHAN, R/O SHREE KRISHNA
HOUSING SOCIETY, HOUSE NO. 12A, FLAT NO. A-2, BHASKAR JYOTI
PARK, MATHURA NAGAR, 2- BESIDE DOWNTOWN HOSPITAL, GUWAHATI
- 781006
VERSUS
SHRI PANDESWARA MADHUSUDHAN
S/O LATE P.V. KRISHNA R/O KANSAS AVENEUE HOUSE NO.1, TRILOK
TRISTAR VILLA, NEAR ROYAL CHAMBER HOTEL, P.O. COIMBATORE
CIVIL AERODROME, COIMBATORE, P.S. E2 PEELAMEDU- 641014, TAMIL
NADU PRESENTLY RESIDING AT C/O H. LALITHA VERI, BHAVANA
ENCLAVE - 2, RAJENDRA NAGAR DOOR NO. 50-17-27/5,
VISAKHAPATNAMA 530016 ANDHRA PRADESH
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR N PATIRI, MR A HAWARI,MR. AMRIT N,MR. A LAL,MR. K
KAKOTI
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. M I HUSSAIN, N. UDDIN,MS. P AHMED,MR. S.
BORGOHAIN
Page No.# 2/4
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
ORDER
10.02.2026
Heard Mr. A Lal, learned counsel for the petitioner wife. Also heard Mr. M
I Hussain, learned counsel for the respondent husband.
2. The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has
been filed seeking enhancement of interim maintenance granted by the learned
Family Court No. 2, Kamrup (Metro), Guwahati [hereinafter referred to as the
learned Family Court] by order dated 28.07.2023 passed in FC(Crl.) Case No.
162/2023, whereby the respondent husband has been directed to pay a sum of
Rs.10,000/- per month to the petitioner wife.
3. The contention of the petitioner is that the respondent is a builder and
developer and is financially well placed, whereas the petitioner is not employed
and has no independent source of income. On the aforesaid premise,
enhancement of interim maintenance to Rs.50,000/- per month has been
sought.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the learned
Family Court has passed a well-reasoned interim order after considering the
affidavits of assets/income/liabilities filed by both the parties. It is contended
that the respondent's disclosed monthly income is Rs.50,000/- and apart from
paying interim maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month, the respondent is also
bearing an additional amount of Rs.10,000/- per month towards the residential
accommodation expenses of the petitioner in terms of the order dated
Page No.# 3/4
26.06.2025 passed in D.V. Case No. 88/2024 pending before the learned Judicial
Magistrate First Class 1, Kamrup (Metro) under Section 23 of the PWDV Act. It is
therefore urged that the claim for enhancement is wholly disproportionate and
beyond the respondent's financial capacity. Learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner submits that an appeal is pending against the said grant of residential
accommodation expenses.
5. This Court has considered the rival submissions and perused the
materials placed on record.
6. At the outset, it is to be noted that the jurisdiction under Article 227 of
the Constitution is supervisory in nature and does not permit this Court to act as
a Court of appeal or to re-appreciate the facts unless the order under challenge
suffers from patent illegality, perversity or jurisdictional error.
7. The learned Family Court has taken into consideration the affidavits of
assets/income/liabilities filed by both the parties, as mandated by law. The
affidavit of the respondent husband reflects a monthly income of Rs.50,000/-.
There is no material placed before this Court to prima facie demonstrate
suppression of income or that the respondent husband is earning substantially
more than what is disclosed.
8. It is also not in dispute that apart from interim maintenance of
Rs.10,000/- per month, the respondent is already paying an additional sum of
Rs.10,000/- per month towards the residential accommodation expenses of the
petitioner. Thus, the total monthly financial outgo of the respondent towards the
petitioner as on date is Rs.20,000/-.
9. The prayer for enhancement of interim maintenance to Rs.50,000/- per
month, in the facts of the present case, would virtually amount to directing the
Page No.# 4/4
respondent to part with his entire disclosed monthly income, which is neither
reasonable nor sustainable at the interim stage.
10. Interim maintenance is intended to provide immediate succour and
prevent destitution pending adjudication of the main proceedings. It is not
meant to determine the final rights of the parties, which shall be decided on the
basis of evidence led before the learned Family Court.
11. This Court finds that the learned Family Court has exercised its discretion
judiciously and within the settled parameters governing the grant of interim
maintenance. No perversity, illegality, or jurisdictional error is made out
warranting interference by this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India.
12. Accordingly, the instant petition is devoid of merit and stands dismissed.
13. It is clarified that the observations made herein are confined to the
adjudication of the present petition and shall not prejudice the rights and
contentions of the parties in the pending proceedings before the learned Family
Court or any other Courts.
14. It is expected that the learned Family Court shall decide the FC(Crl.) Case
No. 162/2023, as expeditiously as possible.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
