JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner wife has challenged the order dated 7th September 2017 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Mumbai on a singular count being that the interim maintenance that has been awarded by the said order is directed to be paid from the date of passing of the order. Learned counsel for the petitioner raises a serious discontent to the maintenance being paid from 7th September 2017 and he would submit that the application on which the order has been passed has been filed on 6th June 2014. The said application being an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in the proceedings for divorce in Petition No. A-30/2014 initiated by the husband seeking dissolution of the marriage solemnized in the year 1999.

2. The Application filed under Section 24 seeking interim maintenance contain an averment that the applicant is the housewife and do not have any independent source of income. She had also stated that her Income Tax returns were filed by her husband. The maintenance has been claimed to the tune of Rs. One Lakh for the applicant wife and Rs.50,000/- per month for the two children who at the relevant time, were aged 11 and 14 years. An averment is found in the application that the respondent is a businessman engaged in the business of export; the business activity being carried out in the name and style of ‘M/s. S.V.K Impex Pvt. Ltd’. It was averred that the monthly income from the said business if Rs.10 lakhs per month and apart from this, reference was made to his other assets such as office premises on ownership business, the brand new cars purchased by him, Fixed Deposits, investments in Mutual Funds, Shares etc. The application preferred on 6th June 2014 also prayed for the litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.50,000/-.

3. An affidavit in reply was filed to the said application where a specific averment is contained in paragraph C to the following effect :

“Respondent also admitted that Petitioner is giving per month 30,000/- as and by way of expenses, in addition to this the list of documents submitted by the Petitioner before this Hon’ble Court clarifies every minute doubt i.e. Rs.15,000/- per month is given for school and tuition fees the minor children, Rs.18,061/- per month is paid by way of EMI for the flat in which Respondent and the minors are residing at present and Rs.11,800/- is paid by Petitioner for various bill i.e. internet, electricity, phone, society maintenance etc, which amounts to Rs.75,000/- per month. Petitioner being a responsible father and husband is paying above mentioned expenses without order of any Hon’ble Court with direction to that effect and also Petitioner has purchased a car Santro 110 Automatic for minor children and the Respondent by way of providing them comfort”.

4. The Family Court on consideration of the rival claim of the parties and after making reference to the bank statements, LIC Policies, Income Tax returns for the Assessment Years 2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17, arrived at a conclusion that the income of the respondent was sufficient enough to justify a direction to pay maintenance of Rs.75,000/- per month to the petitioner no.1 and Rs.40,000/- each to both the children.

5. It would be rightful to reproduce the portion of the order :

“The respondent statement that petitioner’s monthly income is Rs.5 lakhs per month can be accepted. The petitioner’s advocate stressed on the Income Tax returns for the year 2015-16. A person earning annual income of Rs.14 lakhs for the year 2015-16 will rarely afford an Audi car, unless he has some other income which is not shown in the income tax returns. The petitioner is paying expenses of Rs.75,000/- per month to the respondent and both the children which in the given situation is on the lessor side to maintain the respondent’s life style commensurating the standard of life which she was habituated in the company of the petitioner. Considering the petitioner’s average income of Rs.5 lakhs per month, the monthly maintenan