1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3542 OF 2008 Mr.Atul K. Joshi Petitioner vs. Mrs.Hemaxi A. Joshi Respondent Mr.Hemant Kenjalkar for the petitioner. Mr.Jaydev Trivedi for the respondent. CORAM : R.V. MORE,J. DATED : 23rd July, 2008 P.C. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. The petitioner takes exception to the order passed by the Judge of the Family Court, Mumbai on 28.2.2008 below application at Exhibit "18" whereby the interim maintenance granted to the respondent-wife is enhanced from Rs..1,000/- to Rs.3,000/-. 3. The petitioner has filed proceeding for divorce against the respondent-wife and the same is pending before the Family Court at Mumbai. There is no dispute that there are two children out of the wedlock between the petitioner and the respondent. Initially, the respondent-wife filed an application for maintenance and by order dated 22.8.2007 she was granted interim 2 maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,000/- per month and Rs.1,000/- each was given to the two children. Thus, the total amount of Rs.3,000/- was given to the respondent-wife as interim maintenance. There is no dispute that the children as well as the respondent-wife were staying with the petitioner prior to the order dated 22.8.2007. 4. The petitioner, however, filed interim application in the aforesaid proceedings for divorce restraining the respondent-wife from entering into the matrimonial house. The same was rejected by the Family Court. The petitioner’s mother thereafter filed Suit simpliciter for injunction in the City Civil Court restraining the respondent-wife as well as petitioner from entering into the matrimonial house. This application was allowed. In that view of the matter, the respondent-wife is now residing as a paying guest with one Telange in Vile Parle by paying the compensation at the rate of Rs.2500/- per month. In the aforesaid changed circumstances, the respondent-wife filed application for enhancement of interim maintenance. The Family Court, after hearing both the parties, considered the grievance of the wife and was pleased to enhance the interim maintenance from Rs.1000/- to Rs.3,000/- per month. 5. The contention of the respondent=-wife is that she 3 is required to pay an amount of Rs.2500/- towards compensation for paying guest accommodation. This fact is not specifically denied by the petitioner. The fact that the petitioner’s mother obtained injunction against the respondent-wife from entering into the matrimonial house is also not disputed. The petitioner contended that the respondent-wife has done beautician course and she is earning handsome money. However, there is no evidence to that effect. The petitioner is a priest and earns handsome amount. According to the petitioner, his income is not more than Rs.8,000/- to Rs.10,000/- per month. However, the respondent-wife denies this position and states that the petitioner’s income is more than what is shown in the Income Tax Return. The Family Court has considered all these aspects and thereafter has come to the conclusion that the amount of Rs.3,000/- would be reasonable towards interim maintenance in the changed circumstances. 6. I do not see any illegality or perversity in the approach adopted by the Judge, Family Court which enable me to interfere in the impugned order in the exercise of my jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The petition is devoid of any merits and the same is dismissed. [R.V. [R.V. [R.V. MORE,J.] MORE,J.] MORE,J.]