Bombay HC reduced interim maintenance payable by husband from ₹50,000 to ₹25,000 p.m., holding that where both spouses are earning, financial responsibilities cannot be placed entirely on one party.

Court observed that if an expensive lifestyle is to be maintained, both spouses must contribute towards it, while also directing Family Court to conclude the pending maintenance proceedings within 9 months.

The dispute arose after Family Court’s order dated 30.01.2025, directed husband to pay ₹50,000 p.m. as interim maintenance to his wife and their minor son with effect from 30.10.2021 as interim maintenance.

Challenging this order, husband submitted that he had earlier worked as CA in Mumbai with a substantial income but lost his employment during COVID-19 pandemic. Thereafter, he shifted to his native place in MP and resumed practice with considerably reduced earnings.

He further stated that he continued to pay EMIs for 2 residential flats at Andheri and Panvel, apart from supporting his parents and meeting maintenance liabilities. He also expressed willingness to pay ₹25,000 p.m. if the wife agreed to shift to Panvel flat so that Andheri flat could be sold to clear arrears and outstanding loan liabilities. The wife, however, refused to relocate to Panvel flat.

Examining the issue of husband's income, Court held that Family Court had erred in concluding that there was no explanation for the reduction in his earnings. Recognising the widespread economic disruption caused by COVID-19 pandemic, Court observed that husband could not be treated as an exception.

Court also considered the burden of housing loans and noted that husband alone is paying EMIs for both residential flats while wife was making no contribution towards those liabilities. Court observed, "Equality cannot be claimed selectively and certainly not when both parties are earning. If lifestyle is to be maintained, both parties must contribute."

Court further observed that if wife wished to continue residing in a premium locality like Andheri without contributing towards EMIs, husband was justified in seeking reduction of interim maintenance.

While dealing with educational expenses of minor child, Court emphasised that where both parents are earning and expected to contribute financially, decisions regarding child's education should not be taken unilaterally by one parent.

Accordingly, Bombay HC set aside Family Court's order and modified interim maintenance to ₹25,000 p.m.