In a significant development in a long-running matrimonial dispute, the Supreme Court of India has put on hold a Bombay High Court order that had dramatically increased the monthly maintenance payable to a wife from Pune. The apex court's intervention came after the husband challenged the High Court's decision to enhance interim maintenance by seven times.
The Core of the Legal Battle
The Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and K Vinod Chandran, issued the stay order on December 15. However, the bench simultaneously directed the husband to clear all up-to-date arrears of maintenance as per an earlier interim order from the family court within a strict deadline of four weeks. The matter has now been scheduled for its next hearing on January 20, 2026.
The legal saga traces back to a marriage that took place in 1997. The couple separated in 2013, after which the husband filed for divorce in 2015. The Pune family court granted the divorce decree in 2023 on grounds of cruelty, but this decision was subsequently stayed by the High Court as appeals were filed. Currently, cross-appeals from both parties are pending before the High Court.
High Court's Scathing Observations and Enhancement
The controversy stems from an order passed by the Bombay High Court on November 10. A division bench of Justices B P Colabawala and Somasekhar Sundaresan enhanced the wife's monthly interim maintenance from Rs 50,000 to Rs 3.5 lakh. In doing so, the bench made several critical observations.
The High Court noted that the husband had approached the court with "unclean hands and lack of credibility." More importantly, it emphasized that the family court had failed to consider a crucial factor: the wife had invested 16 years, the prime of her life, into the marriage. The bench invoked the welfare objective underlying maintenance laws for divorced women, stating this aspect needed correction in the assessment of permanent alimony. The court clarified that all its remarks were prima facie, pending the final disposal of the appeals.
Supreme Court's Interim Directions and Future Course
Challenging this steep enhancement, the husband moved the Supreme Court, arguing that the High Court had erred in its judgment. The apex court heard arguments from senior counsel Madhavi Divan for the husband and Kamini Jaiswal for the wife.
The Supreme Court's order is a mixed outcome. While it stayed the High Court's directive to pay the enhanced maintenance of Rs 3.5 lakh per month, it upheld the husband's obligation to continue paying the original amount awarded by the family court. The court ordered: "...until the next date, the directions of the HC to pay the enhanced maintenance shall remain stayed, subject to the aforesaid direction and continuous payment of the monthly maintenance as awarded by the Family Court."
The wife has been given time to file her reply in the Supreme Court before the 2026 hearing. The case highlights the complex interplay between interim relief and final settlement in protracted divorce battles, underscoring the courts' focus on both immediate welfare and a thorough examination of all evidence.
