901-WP-15987-2025 (C).doc N.S.Kamble IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 15987 OF 2025 Nitin Vishwas Patil ...Petitioner VERSUS Laxmi Nitin Patil ...Respondent ____________________________________________________________ Mr.Veerdhawal Deshmukh i/b Mr.Ameyprasad Atigre, for the Petitioner. Mr.Rohan Mahadik a/w Ms.Bharvi M. Samel, Ms.Upasana Pandey i/b The Juris Partners, for the Respondent. ____________________________________________________________ CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 3rd SEPTEMBER 2026 P.C. : . The challenge in this Application is to the impugned order dated 18th September 2025, passed by the learned Family Court, Thane, whereby the learned Judge has directed the Petitioner to pay Rs.5,000/- per month maintenance to the Respondent-Wife and Rs.7,000/- per month towards the maintenance to minor son, making a total amount of Rs.12,000/- per month. 2. It is contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner works as a workmen in Mira Motor Workshop and earns Rs.30,000/- per month. The Respondent-Wife resides with the Petitioner. The Petitioner owns one flat and Rs.12,000/- rent receives from the said flat. The Respondent takes that rent and has sufficient source of income. The NILAM SANTOSH KAMBLE Digitally signed by NILAM SANTOSH KAMBLE Date: 2026.09.07 11:53:05 +0530 901-WP-15987-2025 (C).doc N.S.Kamble Respondent-wife earns more than the Petitioner. However, these facts have not been considered by the learned Family Judge and has passed impugned order which is erroneous and requested to allow the Application. 3. It is contention of the learned counsel for the Respondent that, though wife stays with the Petitioner, but she bears her own expenses as well as expenses of her son separately. She has no source of income. The Petitioners bank account shows lakhs of rupees are laying in the bank account. The Petitioner-husband receives rent of Rs.12,000/- in his bank account and Respondent-wife does not get Rs.12,000/- rent. The learned Judge has passed well reasoned order, no interference is required in it and requested to dismiss the Petition. 4. I have heard both learned counsel. Perused impugned judgment and order and the material produced on record. 5. While granting the maintenance, the learned Judge has observed that the minor child is 13 years old and school going, requires additional expenses such as transportation, tution fees, and other expenses amounting to approximately Rs.10,000/- to Rs.12,000/-, apart from the school fees. The bank statement of the Petitioner shows that around Rs.12,89,649/- was deposited in the bank account of the Petitioner. 6. Considering the evidence on record, the learned Judge has 901-WP-15987-2025 (C).doc N.S.Kamble granted an amount of Rs.5,000/- per month to the wife and Rs.7,000/- to the minor son. I do not find infirmity in it. 7. In my view, an amount of Rs.12,000/- per month in the present date is a meager amount towards the expenses of two persons particularly when the minor son is school going. I do not find infirmity in the impugned judgment and order, and I pass following order. ORDER (i) The Petition is dismissed. (ii) All pending Applications are disposed of. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)