IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 23.01.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR and C.M.P.No.1532 of 2025 B.Madhan Babu ... Petitioner vs.

K.M.Sunitha ... Respondent PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to allow the present Civil Revision Petition by setting aside the fair and decreetal orders passed in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in O.P.No.688 of 2019 dated 05.11.2024 on the file of IV Additional Principal Family Court, Chennai.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Prabakar For Respondent : M/s.G.Syed Kaleemullah

O R D E R

The Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the IV Additional Principal Family Court, Chennai in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in O.P.No.688 of 2019, dated 05.11.2024 partly allowing the application filed by the respondent/wife by directing the petitioner/husband to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- per month as interim maintenance.

2. The petitioner/husband filed main original petition in O.P.No.688 of 2019 seeking divorce against the respondent on the ground of cruelty. During the pendency of the main original petition for divorce, the respondent/wife filed an interlocutory application in I.A.No.1 of 2019 seeking interim maintenance of Rs.1,00,000/- per month and Rs.1,00,000/- towards litigation expenses and Rs.25,000/- towards medical expenses. The Family Court, by impugned order directed the petitioner/husband to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- per month towards interim maintenance to the respondent/wife. He was further directed to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards litigation expenses. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner/husband has come before this Court by way of filing this civil revision petition.

3. In the affidavit filed in support of the interim maintenance application, it was stated by the respondent that she has got two girl children through her first marriage and she married the petitioner after getting divorce from the first husband. The marriage between the petitioner and respondent was solemnised on 11.02.2018. However, after sometime, the respondent was neglected by the petitioner and hence, she has been struggling without any income. It is further stated that the petitioner was employed as Marine Engineer in British Petrol Shipping Company, Chennai and earning a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- per month.

4. In his counter to the application for interim maintenance filed by the respondent/wife, the petitioner/husband denied the claim made by the respondent about the quantum of income. It was stated by the petitioner that respondent is employed as a Teacher in a School and getting handful of income. It is also stated by the petitioner that due to his health condition, he could not undertake any employment and he has been unemployed for the past one year and hence, he sought for dismissal of the application for interim maintenance.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/husband assailed the impugned order passed by the Family Court mainly on the ground that petitioner developed ‘Chronic Hepatitis B’ and hence, became unfit for employment in the ship. It is stated by the learned counsel that the petitioner is unemployed now and he has no source of income. Therefore, according to him, the interim maintenance amount of Rs.30,000/- fixed by the Family Court is very much on higher side. The learned counsel further submitted that the respondent is employed as a French Teacher in a Private School and earning handful of income.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent/wife submitted that the respondent already resigned her job due to compelling circumstances and the relieving letter was marked before the Court. Therefore, according to the learned counsel, she is struggling without any income. It is further submitted that petitioner/husband is a Marine Engineer employed in ship and he has been earning more than Rs.5,00,000/- per month and therefore, the quantum of interim maintenance fixed by the Family Court is a moderate one.

7. A perusal o