HC orders NRI husband to pay interim maintenance to bedridden wife

Bombay HC orders NRI husband to pay ₹1,20,000/month interim maintenance to vegetative wife in Mumbai, reversing reduction from ₹25,000/month.

Mumbai: The Bombay high court recently ordered an NRI husband to pay interim maintenance of ₹1,20,000 per month to his wife in Mumbai, who is in a vegetative state, reversing an earlier decision that had drastically reduced the amount to ₹25,000 per month. “The Appellate Court’s reduction of maintenance from ₹1,20,000 to ₹25,000 per month is completely bereft of any findings or reasoning,” Justice Sharmila U Deshmukh said.

HT Image

The judge emphasised the urgent need for proper medical care for Krisha Manglani, who suffered a brain haemorrhage due to Arteriovenous Malformation (AVM), leaving her bedridden and in constant need of medical assistance. Her father had filed an application on her behalf under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act), seeking financial support from her husband.

According to the petition, Krisha and Sagar married in January 2016 and moved to the United Kingdom, where Sagar was employed as a Chartered Accountant (CA). Allegations of domestic violence surfaced, leading to Krisha’s deteriorating health. After Krisha was hospitalised in February 2017, her family decided to bring her back to Mumbai for better medical care despite assurances from Sagar to cover her maintenance expenses.

The Metropolitan Magistrate initially granted an interim maintenance of ₹1,20,000 per month, based on Sagar’s substantial income as a CA in the UK. However, Sagar contested this order, and the Appellate Court controversially reduced the amount to ₹25,000 per month without providing adequate reasoning.

The high court highlighted that the appellate court’s reduction of maintenance lacked any substantial findings or justification. The court emphasised the urgent need for Krisha’s medical care and upheld the trial court’s original maintenance order, considering Sagar’s monthly earnings of £34,953 ( ₹37,07,930).

It also noted that the appellate court had not stayed the trial court’s proceedings, meaning the original maintenance order was still in effect. The court asserted that the appellate court could not alter this amount without proper justification, particularly given Sagar’s failure to contribute any interim maintenance despite his high income.