Interim maintenance of ₹6,000 per month was reasonable pending final adjudication.

The wife, aged 71, applied to the Family Court for maintenance, stating that her husband, aged 75 and a retired Veterinary Department supervisor, had left her and was receiving a pension of ₹40,000 per month.

She sought interim maintenance of ₹25,000 per month, citing her age and medical needs.

The husband opposed the application, asserting that the wife lived with their son in a house he had built, that he had health problems and medical expenses, and that the claim was intended to harass him.

The Family Court awarded the wife interim maintenance of ₹6,000 per month, with litigation expenses, from the date of the application until disposal of the maintenance petition.

The wife sought enhancement, while the husband sought to set aside the award.

1. Whether the interim maintenance of ₹6,000 per month should be enhanced to ₹25,000 per month on the wife’s petition.

2. Whether the Family Court’s interim maintenance order should be set aside on the husband’s petition.

The judgment does not identify a specific statutory provision, precedent, or separately stated legal test governing interim maintenance.

The Court assessed whether the Family Court’s interim award was reasonable on the circumstances presented, including the husband’s stated pension, the wife’s living arrangements, and the parties’ respective contentions.

The Court noted that the maintenance petition remained pending and treated the challenged award as an interim determination.

In considering the wife’s request for enhancement, it took account of her residence with the parties’ son in a house constructed by the husband and concluded that ₹6,000 per month was reasonable at that stage.

In considering the husband’s challenge, the Court observed that he was stated to receive a pension of ₹40,000 per month, and found that his grounds for setting aside the award were unsustainable.

It did not finally determine the parties’ maintenance claims on their merits.