1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 2952 OF 2010. Mahesh Sukhdeo Moon -: VERSUS :- Aarti Mahesh Moon. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : OCTOBER 07, 2010. Heard Shri R. Joshi, learned Counsel for Petitioner and Shri M.P. Khajanchi, learned Counsel for respondent. Rule is made returnable forthwith and matter is heard finally. Shri Joshi, learned counsel contends that the Civil Court at Chandrapur has granted interim maintenance of Rs. 6000/- per month to respondent wife and child together. The fact that respondent wife has enrolled herself as Advocate, as member of the District Bar Association at Chandrapur has been overlooked and the negative burden has been cast upon the petitioner / husband by observing that the petitioner husband has not brought it on record to show her monthly income. He is relying upon the judgment 2 reported at AIR 1992 Bombay 493 (Smt. Kanchan Kamelendra Sawarkar .vrs. Kamalendra @ Kamalakar Rajaram Sawarkar) to urge that when wife is well qualified and able bodied, she is not handicapped and therefore, is expected to earn for herself. According to him, in these circumstances the burden was upon the respondent to show that she is not earning any amount per month or then she is not able to earn anything. Shri Khajanchi, learned counsel has contended that all relevant aspects are rightly looked into by the trial Court. Respondent wife had claimed interim maintenance of Rs. 20,000/- per month looking to the standard of living of petitioner. Merely because she has enrolled herself as Advocate, that does not mean that she is earning any amount. He therefore, urges that this Court should not interfere in the matter in writ jurisdiction. The facts show that the interim maintenance of Rs. 6000/- has been awarded not only to respondent wife, but also to child staying with her. The wife is stated to be a practicing Advocate, however, those details are not brought on record by the petitioner husband and the respondent wife has also not disclosed practice if any, in her application for interim maintenance. In the circumstances, I find that 3 interest of justice can be met with by permitting respondent / wife to place appropriate affidavit before the trial Court showing her status and nature of practice. After such affidavit is placed on record, the trial Court shall reconsider the interim maintenance as awarded as also find out the entitlement of respondent to claim such maintenance for herself. While doing so, the order dated 24.02.2010 or observations made therein shall not influence it in any way. The respondent shall file appropriate affidavit within three weeks from today and the trial Court shall pass fresh orders as mentioned above within further period of four weeks thereafter. The arrangement made by the impugned order below Exh.10 dated 20.04.2010 shall hold the field and bind the parties till the trial Court passes further appropriate orders in this respect. Petitioner shall clear the arrears payable till 31.10.2010 as it includes amount of maintenance for child also. Writ Petition is thus allowed. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms, with no order as to costs. JUDGE Rgd.