1 wp6847.sxw ssp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6847 OF 2010 Ganesh Eknath Pathare ...Petitioner vs. Rameshwari Ganesh Pathare ...Respondent Mr.M.B.Jadhav i/b Mr.S.S.Sayyed & R.S.Jadhav for the petitioner Mr.M.S.Gandhare for the respondent CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 8, 2010 P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner-husband by this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has challenged the interim order passed by the learned Judge of the Family Court by which the petitioner has been directed to pay interim maintenance at the rate of Rs.5,000/- per month to the respondent-wife and interim maintenance of Rs.2500/- to the minor daughter. 2 The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the certificate produced before the trial Court, the monthly income of the petitioner is only Rs. 4000/- per month and therefore, it is impossible for him to pay maintenance as directed under the impugned order. He submitted that the insurance premium is being paid by the petitioner s father and not by the petitioner and therefore, the learned Judge of the Family Court could not have taken into consideration the payment of yearly premium. 3 I have given careful consideration to the 2 wp6847.sxw submissions. The learned Judge of the Family Court found that the petitioner has taken insurance policy in his name where the annual premium payable is Rs.50,022/-. Moreover, on the basis of the information supplied by the Regional Transport Office, the learned Judge found that the petitioner was the owner of the Maruti Swift car. 4 Thus, what has been found is that the petitioner is capable of paying yearly insurance premium of Rs. 50,000/- and more and holding a Maruti Swift car. The certificate produced by the petitioner before the Family Court shows that he was working as Financial Advisor with a company and was drawing a remuneration of Rs.4000/- per month. As the petitioner is working as Financial Advisor, the learned Judge recorded a primafacie finding that the job of Advisor cannot be a full time job. The case made out before this Court that the premium amount is being paid by the father of the petitioner was not made out before the Family Court. In the application for maintenance filed by the respondent, a specific case has been made out that the petitioner was paying L.I.C premium in the sum of Rs.75,423/- per year. In reply to the application for maintenance, the petitioner has not pleaded that premium amount is being paid by his father. 5 The total maintenance payable under the impugned Award is Rs.7500/- per month to the respondent-wife and to the minor daughter. The petitioner is capable of making yearly payment of premium of Rs.50,022/- and holding a Maruti Swift car. Therefore, maintenance amount is reasonable. No case for interference is made out. Writ Petition is rejected. JUDGE