3-WP-7804-2025 (C).doc Tikam IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7804 OF 2025 Dhaval Doshi ...Petitioner/s VERSUS Grishma Doshi ...Respondent/s _________________________________________________________________ Mr. R.T. Lalwani a/w. Sadhna Jayker (Lalwani) a/w. J.K. shah a/w. Namrata Thakur a/w Tejashree Gawde i/by R.S. Law, Advocates for the Petitioner. Ms. Taubon F. Irani a/w. Ms. Tasneem Siddiquee a/w. Divya Sharma a/w. Khushi Sonkar a/w Kabir Mansinghani, Advocates for the Respondent. _________________________________________________________________ CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 28th SEPTEMBER 2026. P.C. : 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the Respondent. 2. The challenge in this Petition is to the impugned order below Exhibit 16 passed by the Learned Family Court, Mumbai below Exhibit 16 whereby the Learned Judge has awarded maintenance of Rs.2,50,000/- per month to the Respondent-wife and the Petitioner has also been directed to pay gas, electricity, society maintenance, fuel charges and other miscellaneous expenses as mentioned in para. no. 24 of reply filed by the Petitioner-husband. 3. It is contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Learned Judge has awarded an exorbitant amount of maintenance of VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM Digitally signed by VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM Date: 2026.10.07 17:41:00 +0530 3-WP-7804-2025 (C).doc Tikam Rs.2,50,000/- without any reasonable ground. Learned counsel further submitted that the Respondent-wife is residing in the house belonging to the Petitioner's company. The Petitioner's company is paying the maintenance and repair charges of the said house. The Respondent has no source of income. Her bank statement shows that handsome amount have been deposited in her bank account. She has also invested in mutual funds and has a permanent source of income. Out of the wedlock, Petitioner and Respondent have two twin sons. The Petitioner's company has borne the educational expenses of their son. The Petitioner is not the owner of the company and he has some shares in the said company. However, these facts are not considered by the Learned Family Judge and has passed the impugned order,which is erroneous and requested to allow the Petition. 4. It is contention of learned counsel for the Respondent that the marriage lasted for 30 years. The Petitioner is the founder of the company. His minimum annual income from the said company is Rs.1.5 Crores. For past 30 years, Respondent enjoyed a luxurious lifestyle with the Petitioner. At present, the Respondent is residing with her two sons in the said house. The Respondent is required to send the bills to be Petitioner from time to time for reimbursement of the expenses. The Learned Family Judge has passed a well reasoned order on the statement made by the Petitioner in 3-WP-7804-2025 (C).doc Tikam the affidavit in reply that the Petitioner will pay the society maintenance, fuel charges and other miscellaneous expenses. The Respondent is diabetic and requires medical expenses every month and occasional hospitalization. The order passed by the Family Court is a well reasoned order. No interference is required in it and requested to dismiss the petition. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, on instructions, submits that Petitioner is ready to pay the society maintenance, electricity charges and repairs charges of the premises, which are presently being paid by the Company and deducted from the salary of the Petitioner. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that the Petitioner is ready to give an undertaking to pay Rs.10,000/- per month towards medical expenses to the Respondent and he will obtain a medical policy for the Respondent covering hospitalization expenses. 6. I have heard both learned counsel. Perused the impugned order. It appears from record that earlier the Petitioner was paying Rs.1,30,000/- per month as maintenance to the Respondent. The sons of the Petitioner and Respondent are majors and are staying with the respondent. The maintenance of Rs.2,50,000/- per month has been granted to the Petitioner, which is on higher side. The respondent was staying with Petitioner for 30 years. She has accustomed with life style of the Petitioner. She is staying with her two sons. The Petitioner was paying 3-WP-7804-2025 (C).doc Tikam Rs.1,30,000/-. Considering these facts, I am inclined to award maintenance of Rs.2,00,000/- per month to the Respondent, particularly as the Petitioner is undertaken to pay Rs.10,000/- per month towards medical expenses to the Respondent and has further undertaken to obtain an annual medical insurance policy for the Respondent covering hospitalization expenses. 7. In view of above, I pass following order: ORDER (i) The Petition is partly allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 03/03/2025 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Mumbai is modified as under:- (a) The Petitioner shall pay an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- per month as maintenance to the Respondent from the date of order passed by the Family Court i.e. 03/03/2025. (b) The excess amount shall be adjusted from the amount to be paid to the Respondent. (c) The Petitioner shall pay the entire arrears of maintenance amount within a period of three months. (d) The Petitioner shall pay rs.10,000/- as medical 3-WP-7804-2025 (C).doc Tikam expenses to the Respondent and shall take annual medical policy of the Respondent. The Petitioner shall pay electricity charges, repair charges and society maintenance charges of the premises where Respondent is staying. (e) Writ Petition is disposed of. (f) All contentions of both the parties are kept open. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)