One of the most common questions asked by a wife who files a maintenance case before the Family Court, Indore is:
“How long will it take to get interim maintenance?”
The short answer is that Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) provides that an application for interim maintenance and expenses of the proceedings should, as far as possible, be disposed of within 60 days from the date of service of notice on the respondent.
However, this does not mean that every applicant will receive an interim-maintenance order within exactly 60 days.
The expression “as far as possible” is important. The actual time can depend upon service of notice, the husband’s appearance, filing of reply, financial disclosures, documents, objections, adjournments, the complexity of the parties’ financial circumstances and the workload of the concerned Family Court.
The Supreme Court in Rajnesh v. Neha specifically noted that although statutory provisions prescribe a time frame for interim maintenance, such applications have in practice sometimes remained pending for much longer periods because of court workload, repeated adjournments and lengthy pleadings at the interim stage. The Supreme Court therefore emphasised the need for expeditious disposal.
For a litigant before Family Court, Indore, it is therefore important to understand both the statutory expectation of 60 days and the practical procedure that can affect the actual timeline.
What does Section 144 BNSS say about the time for interim maintenance?
Section 144 BNSS expressly permits the court, during the pendency of a maintenance proceeding, to grant:
- interim maintenance; and
- reasonable expenses of the proceedings.
The provision further states that an application for interim maintenance and proceedings expenses should, as far as possible, be disposed of within 60 days from the date of service of notice of the application on the respondent.
This is an important point.
The 60-day period is linked to service of notice, not simply the date on which the wife files the application.
For example, if a wife files an interim-maintenance application on 1 January but the husband is served only on 20 January, the statutory 60-day reference period is linked to service of notice rather than simply the filing date.
Does “60 days” mean that I will definitely get maintenance within 60 days?
No.
This is perhaps the most important practical point.
Section 144 uses the words:
“as far as possible”
Therefore, the provision expresses a legislative expectation of expeditious disposal rather than creating an unconditional guarantee that every interim-maintenance application will necessarily be decided within exactly 60 days.
Several things can affect the timeline.
For example:
- notice may take time to be served;
- the respondent may seek time to file a reply;
- financial disclosure may be incomplete;
- income may be disputed;
- documents may need to be produced;
- jurisdiction may be challenged;
- parties may seek adjournments;
- other applications may be pending;
- the court may have a heavy docket; or
- the financial circumstances may be unusually complicated.
The Supreme Court recognised these practical difficulties in Rajnesh v. Neha.
From which date is the 60-day period counted?
The statutory wording is important.
The 60-day period is to be calculated from the date of service of notice of the interim-maintenance application on the respondent.
Therefore, there are potentially three different dates in a case:
- the date on which the main maintenance case is filed;
- the date on which the interim-maintenance application is filed; and
- the date on which notice of the interim-maintenance application is served upon the respondent.
For the specific 60-day provision in Section 144, the relevant reference point is service of notice.
What happens after filing an interim-maintenance application in Family Court, Indore?
Although the precise procedure can vary according to the case, a typical proceeding may involve the following stages.
Stage 1: Filing of the Section 144 maintenance case
The wife files her maintenance proceeding before the Family Court, Indore, where the court has jurisdiction.
Section 145 BNSS provides several territorial bases for a Section 144 proceeding, including the district where the husband is, where the husband or wife resides, or where the husband last resided with his wife.
Stage 2: Filing of the interim-maintenance application
The wife files an application seeking:
- interim maintenance;
- reasonable expenses of proceedings; and
- such other appropriate interim relief as may be legally available.
Stage 3: Notice to the husband
The court issues notice in accordance with the applicable procedure.
This stage can sometimes cause delay.
If the husband is residing outside Indore, another State or even abroad, service can require additional time depending upon the circumstances and mode of service.
Stage 4: Husband appears
The husband may appear personally or through counsel as permitted by the court and applicable procedure.
Section 145 BNSS also provides for circumstances in which personal attendance may be dispensed with, and it contains provisions concerning wilful avoidance of service or attendance.
Stage 5: Husband files reply
The husband may contest:
- entitlement;
- income;
- wife’s income;
- expenses;
- jurisdiction;
- matrimonial circumstances;
- children’s expenses;
- liabilities; and
- the amount claimed.
Stage 6: Financial disclosure
The financial position of both parties becomes important.
The Supreme Court in Rajnesh v. Neha prescribed affidavits of disclosure of assets and liabilities in maintenance proceedings. The directions expressly contemplate such disclosure in pending maintenance proceedings before Family Courts, District Courts and Magistrates’ Courts.
Stage 7: Consideration of documents
The court may consider the available material concerning:
- salary;
- business income;
- professional income;
- rental income;
- property;
- liabilities;
- wife’s income;
- children’s expenses; and
- other financial circumstances.
Stage 8: Hearing on interim maintenance
After the relevant pleadings and financial material are before the court, the parties may make submissions concerning:
- entitlement;
- financial need;
- husband’s means;
- wife’s income;
- children’s requirements; and
- appropriate quantum.
Stage 9: Interim order
The Family Court may then pass an appropriate reasoned order granting, modifying or refusing interim maintenance according to the facts and applicable law.
What is a realistic timeline?
It is not advisable for a lawyer or litigant to promise a fixed number of days.
However, the statutory framework provides an important benchmark.
A simplified illustration is:
Filing → Notice → Service → Reply → Financial disclosure → Hearing → Interim order
Section 144 says the application should, as far as possible, be disposed of within 60 days from service of notice.
In a straightforward case where:
- service is prompt;
- the husband appears;
- reply is filed without unnecessary delay;
- financial disclosures are complete;
- there are few disputed documents; and
- neither side seeks repeated adjournments,
the application may proceed relatively quickly.
On the other hand, a financially complicated or heavily contested case can take longer.
Therefore, 60 days should be understood as a statutory benchmark for expeditious disposal, not as a guaranteed delivery date for the maintenance money.
Why can an interim-maintenance application take longer than 60 days?
There are several common reasons.
1. Delay in service of notice
If the respondent cannot be promptly served, the proceeding may not effectively move forward.
This is particularly relevant where the husband:
- has changed his address;
- works in another city;
- resides outside Madhya Pradesh;
- resides abroad; or
- is alleged to be avoiding service.
2. Repeated adjournments
Repeated requests for time can delay the matter.
The Supreme Court in Rajnesh v. Neha specifically identified repetitive adjournments as one of the reasons interim-maintenance applications have sometimes remained pending for prolonged periods.
3. Dispute regarding income
Suppose the wife says:
“My husband earns ₹3 lakh per month.”
The husband responds:
“I earn only ₹50,000.”
The court may then have to examine:
- salary records;
- income-tax documents;
- business records;
- bank-related material;
- financial affidavits;
- property;
- lifestyle; and
- other available evidence.
This can complicate the interim determination.
4. Incomplete financial disclosure
If one party does not provide adequate financial information, the court may require further disclosure.
The Supreme Court recognised that inadequate disclosure can make it difficult for a Family Court to make an objective assessment of interim maintenance.
5. Jurisdiction objection
A husband may contend that Family Court, Indore lacks territorial jurisdiction.
For example, he may dispute:
- the wife’s residence in Indore;
- the parties’ last shared residence in Indore; or
- another statutory jurisdictional basis.
Such an objection can add a procedural issue to the case.
However, the mere fact that the husband resides outside Indore does not automatically defeat jurisdiction if a valid Section 145 ground exists.
6. Multiple proceedings
Maintenance disputes sometimes involve proceedings under more than one statute.
For example, there may be proceedings involving:
- Section 144 BNSS;
- domestic violence legislation;
- matrimonial proceedings; or
- other maintenance provisions.
The Supreme Court has directed parties to disclose previous maintenance proceedings and orders and has provided for appropriate adjustment or set-off to prevent overlapping recovery.
This can require additional examination.
Does the Family Court have to wait for the final maintenance case?
No.
That would defeat the purpose of interim maintenance.
Interim maintenance exists precisely to provide financial support during the pendency of the main case.
The court does not have to finally decide every disputed issue in the main maintenance proceeding before considering interim relief.
At the interim stage, the court generally makes a prima facie assessment based upon the pleadings and financial material available.
The Supreme Court in Rajnesh v. Neha recognised that interim-maintenance decisions involve a prima facie assessment and that the court may have to make a reasonable estimation based on the available material.
Does the court have to conduct a full trial before granting interim maintenance?
Generally, no.
Interim maintenance is not the final adjudication of the entire maintenance claim.
The court can consider the material necessary to determine interim relief without converting the interim application into a full trial.
This is important because the purpose of interim maintenance would otherwise be defeated.
The Supreme Court has recognised that interim maintenance is generally determined on the basis of pleadings and financial disclosure, with a prima facie assessment rather than a complete final trial at that stage.
Can the wife request early disposal of the interim-maintenance application?
Yes.
If the applicant has genuine financial hardship, the circumstances can be brought to the attention of the Family Court.
The applicant can point out:
- lack of independent income;
- inability to meet basic expenses;
- children’s urgent educational expenses;
- medical requirements;
- inability to pay reasonable living expenses; or
- other circumstances demonstrating urgency.
The statutory provision itself reflects the intention that interim-maintenance applications should be dealt with expeditiously.
However, the applicant should avoid treating the 60-day provision as though it were an automatic order requiring disposal on a particular calendar date.
What if I have no money while waiting for interim maintenance?
This is one of the most serious practical difficulties in maintenance litigation.
A wife who has no independent income may have to rely upon:
- parents;
- relatives;
- friends;
- savings; or
- temporary financial arrangements
while the application is pending.
The Supreme Court in Rajnesh v. Neha specifically observed that prolonged pendency of interim-maintenance applications can cause hardship to a dependent spouse who may have to borrow money from parents or relatives during the interim period.
Therefore, where there is genuine financial urgency, it is important to bring that circumstance before the court rather than simply waiting silently.
Can I request an urgent hearing?
A litigant can place genuine urgency before the court and seek appropriate procedural directions.
For example, an applicant may explain that:
- she has no independent income;
- minor children are dependent upon her;
- school fees are overdue;
- there are pressing medical expenses;
- she has no accommodation or is struggling to pay rent; or
- basic living expenses cannot be met.
Whether an early hearing is granted depends upon the court and the facts of the particular case.
The important point is to demonstrate urgency with facts and documents.
For example, a school fee demand notice is more persuasive than a general statement that “the children need money.”
What if the husband keeps asking for time?
Repeated adjournments can contribute significantly to delay.
If the husband repeatedly seeks time without adequate justification, the applicant can bring the history of adjournments to the court’s notice and request that the interim application be taken up expeditiously.
The Supreme Court in Rajnesh v. Neha expressly recognised repeated adjournments as one cause of delay in interim-maintenance proceedings.
A proper record of the dates and reasons for adjournments can therefore be useful.
What if the husband does not disclose his income?
This can create difficulty in deciding the quantum.
The Supreme Court’s disclosure framework in Rajnesh v. Neha is designed to make the financial position of both parties clearer. The Court directed that the prescribed affidavits of assets and liabilities be filed in maintenance proceedings.
If the husband provides incomplete or contradictory information, the wife should identify the specific discrepancies.
For example:
Claim in affidavit: ₹50,000 salary.
Earlier court proceeding: ₹1,20,000 monthly salary.
Publicly available professional information: substantially higher position.
Lifestyle/property evidence: inconsistent with the disclosed income.
Such specific contradictions can be more useful than a general allegation that the husband is “hiding income.”
What if the husband’s income cannot be proved exactly?
Exact proof of every rupee may not always be available at the interim stage.
The Supreme Court has recognised that interim maintenance may involve a prima facie assessment and some reasonable estimation based on the material available.
For example, if the husband is self-employed and does not maintain transparent financial records, the court may have to assess his financial capacity from the available material.
Relevant factors can include:
- previous income;
- qualifications;
- profession;
- business;
- property;
- rental income;
- lifestyle;
- bank-related material;
- tax records;
- business records; and
- other reliable evidence.
Can interim maintenance be granted even if the husband says he is unemployed?
The allegation of unemployment has to be examined on its facts.
A genuine loss of employment can obviously affect financial capacity.
But if the evidence suggests that a husband deliberately stopped working or substantially reduced his income, the court can examine that circumstance.
For example, the following may be relevant:
- previous salary;
- professional qualifications;
- employment history;
- business experience;
- timing of resignation;
- assets;
- lifestyle;
- attempts to obtain new employment; and
- circumstances surrounding cessation of income.
The court should not automatically assume either that unemployment is genuine or that it is deliberate.
Does the wife have to prove the husband’s exact salary before getting interim maintenance?
Not necessarily.
The court can make a prima facie assessment from the material available.
This is one reason financial disclosure is important.
The wife should provide whatever credible information she possesses, while the husband should disclose his financial position honestly.
The Supreme Court’s Rajnesh v. Neha framework is intended to reduce the uncertainty created when parties provide incomplete financial information.
Can the Family Court, Indore pass an interim-maintenance order while the husband lives outside Indore?
Yes, where the proceeding is otherwise within the court’s jurisdiction.
Section 145 BNSS provides that Section 144 proceedings may be instituted in a district where:
- the husband is;
- the husband or wife resides;
- the husband last resided with his wife; or
- the husband’s father or mother resides.
Thus, a husband working in another city does not automatically prevent a properly maintainable proceeding before Family Court, Indore.
The practical issue may instead be service and participation.
What if the husband deliberately avoids service?
Section 145 BNSS contains a specific provision permitting the court, where it is satisfied that the respondent is wilfully avoiding service or wilfully neglecting to attend, to proceed ex parte, subject to the statutory safeguards concerning setting aside such an order for good cause.
Therefore, deliberately avoiding the proceedings is not necessarily a strategy that can permanently prevent the case from moving forward.
The applicant should maintain proper proof of the attempts made to serve the respondent.
Can jurisdiction objections indefinitely delay interim maintenance?
A genuine jurisdiction objection must be considered by the court.
However, the existence of an objection does not automatically mean that every other aspect of the case must remain indefinitely stalled.
The applicant can place the statutory basis for jurisdiction before the court and explain why the proceeding is maintainable in Indore.
For example, if the wife genuinely resides in Indore, Section 145(1)(b) may be relevant.
If the parties last resided together in Indore, Section 145(1)(c) may be relevant.
The precise facts should be pleaded and supported appropriately.
What is the importance of the Rajnesh v. Neha judgment?
The Supreme Court’s decision in Rajnesh v. Neha is extremely important in maintenance litigation.
The judgment addressed:
- interim maintenance;
- financial disclosure;
- assets and liabilities;
- criteria for determining quantum;
- date from which maintenance should be awarded;
- overlapping maintenance proceedings; and
- enforcement.
Most importantly for the question of delay, the Supreme Court expressly noted that interim-maintenance applications were often not being disposed of within the statutory time frame and identified factors such as court workload, repeated adjournments and prolonged pleadings.
The Court also directed Family Courts to endeavour to decide interim-maintenance applications by a reasoned order within four to six months at the latest after the affidavits of disclosure have been filed, subject to the circumstances described in the judgment.
This is an important distinction:
Section 144 BNSS: as far as possible, disposal within 60 days from service of notice.
Rajnesh framework: endeavour to decide the interim application by a reasoned order within four to six months at the latest after the financial disclosure affidavits have been filed.
These are not necessarily contradictory. The statutory 60-day provision is the legislative benchmark, while Rajnesh v. Neha addressed the practical problem of prolonged interim proceedings and laid down a procedural framework for expeditious disposal.
Does the four-to-six-month period mean I must wait four to six months?
No.
It should not be read that way.
The Supreme Court’s four-to-six-month direction was framed in the context of the procedural framework after filing of the disclosure affidavits and was intended to prevent interim applications from remaining pending indefinitely.
It does not mean that every applicant should simply wait four to six months before asking the court for relief.
Where the statutory conditions and circumstances permit, the court can decide an application earlier.
What can an applicant do to avoid unnecessary delay?
A well-prepared case can reduce avoidable procedural delays.
1. Ensure correct address of the respondent
Incorrect or incomplete addresses can delay service.
2. File a complete interim application
Avoid repeated amendments caused by missing basic information.
3. File financial disclosure properly
Complete financial disclosure allows the court to assess the case more effectively.
4. Provide supporting documents
Do not make financial allegations without any supporting material where such material can reasonably be obtained.
5. Give a realistic expense statement
A clear monthly calculation makes the financial requirement easier to understand.
6. Disclose previous maintenance cases
This avoids later complications concerning overlapping orders.
7. Respond promptly to the husband’s reply
If there are financial contradictions, identify them clearly.
8. Avoid unnecessary adjournments
Both sides should cooperate in expediting the interim application.
9. Keep the case focused
The interim application should not become a substitute for the entire trial.
10. Demonstrate genuine urgency
If there is serious financial hardship, place the facts and documents before the court.
What documents can help demonstrate urgency?
Depending upon the circumstances, useful documents may include:
- rent demand or rent agreement;
- school fee demand;
- medical bills;
- prescriptions;
- salary slips;
- bank statements;
- utility bills;
- educational expenses;
- evidence of unemployment;
- children’s expenses;
- evidence of husband’s income;
- previous financial disclosures; and
- other relevant financial records.
The object is to demonstrate the actual financial situation, not merely to create an impression of urgency.
Can interim maintenance be awarded from the date of the application?
Section 144(2) BNSS provides that maintenance or interim maintenance may be payable from the date of the order or, if so directed, from the date of the application.
The Supreme Court’s Rajnesh v. Neha guidelines also addressed the date from which maintenance should be awarded and directed that maintenance ordinarily be awarded from the date of the application.
Therefore, the applicant should clearly plead the date of the interim-maintenance application and make an appropriate prayer concerning the effective date.
Does delay in deciding interim maintenance mean that the applicant loses the arrears?
Not necessarily.
The effective date of the maintenance order is important.
If the court directs that interim maintenance is payable from the date of the application, the financial liability can relate back to that date rather than beginning only on the date on which the order is pronounced.
However, the precise effect depends upon the order passed by the court and the applicable legal principles.
Therefore, an applicant should not assume that every month of pendency automatically results in an identical arrear. The operative maintenance order must be examined carefully.
Can the amount of interim maintenance be changed later?
Yes, depending upon a change in circumstances and the applicable law.
Section 146 BNSS provides for alteration of the maintenance allowance upon proof of a change in circumstances.
For example:
- husband’s income may increase;
- wife’s income may change;
- a child may enter a new educational stage;
- medical expenses may increase;
- accommodation circumstances may change; or
- another significant financial circumstance may arise.
Thus, the interim order does not necessarily freeze the financial position of the parties permanently.
Can an interim-maintenance order be challenged?
A party aggrieved by an interim-maintenance order may have an appropriate legal remedy depending upon the nature of the order, the court that passed it and the applicable procedural law.
The precise remedy should be examined on the facts of the particular case.
For example, in a 2025 revision arising from a Family Court in Madhya Pradesh, the Madhya Pradesh High Court considered a challenge concerning interim maintenance and observed that the appropriate amount depends upon the factual matrix of each case.
This illustrates another important point: the quantum of interim maintenance is fact-specific.
Is there any fixed amount of time for the husband to start paying after the order?
The answer depends upon the terms of the particular interim-maintenance order.
The order should be examined for:
- the date from which maintenance is payable;
- monthly due date;
- arrears;
- mode of payment;
- any time granted for compliance; and
- other directions.
The applicant should not rely on assumptions where the operative order itself provides the relevant timeline.
What if the husband does not pay after the interim order?
Section 144(3) BNSS contains enforcement provisions for breach of a maintenance order, including recovery mechanisms subject to statutory requirements. Section 147 deals with enforcement of maintenance orders.
If the husband fails to comply, the applicant should maintain an accurate calculation of:
- monthly amount ordered;
- payments received;
- unpaid months;
- total arrears; and
- dates on which payments were due.
An appropriate enforcement/recovery application can then be considered.
A practical timeline for a wife filing in Family Court, Indore
A useful way to understand the process is:
Day 1: Interim-maintenance application filed.
Next stage: Court processes the application and issues notice.
Service stage: Notice is served upon the husband.
After service: Husband appears and files reply.
Financial disclosure: Parties file the required financial information/affidavits.
Interim hearing: Court considers entitlement and quantum.
Order: Family Court passes an interim-maintenance order.
The statutory benchmark is 60 days from service of notice, as far as possible.
In a straightforward matter, the process may move relatively quickly. In a contested case involving disputed income, repeated adjournments, jurisdiction objections or incomplete disclosures, it can take longer.
Therefore, a lawyer should be careful about telling a client:
“You will definitely get interim maintenance in 60 days.”
That would be an overstatement.
A more accurate explanation is:
“Section 144 BNSS provides a 60-day benchmark from service of notice for disposal of the interim-maintenance application, as far as possible. The actual time depends upon the progress of the case and the conduct of the parties.”
What should a wife do if the application remains pending for a long time?
If an interim-maintenance application has remained pending for an unusually long period, the applicant can consider placing before the Family Court:
- the date of filing;
- date of service;
- dates of hearings;
- number of adjournments;
- whether the respondent has filed the required disclosure;
- whether the applicant has complied with her own disclosure;
- financial hardship;
- children’s requirements; and
- any urgent circumstances.
An appropriate request for expeditious disposal can then be made.
The request should be based upon the statutory framework and the actual procedural history rather than simply stating that “60 days have expired.”
Special importance where minor children are involved
Delay can become particularly serious when minor children are dependent upon the wife.
For example, if the children have:
- school fees;
- tuition expenses;
- medical treatment;
- transportation costs;
- educational requirements; or
- other immediate necessities,
the applicant should place those expenses before the court.
The financial needs of children are relevant to the overall interim-maintenance assessment.
Special importance where the wife has no income
Where the wife has no independent income, the practical consequences of delay may be greater.
She should clearly disclose:
- absence of employment;
- absence of independent income;
- available savings;
- assets;
- financial dependence;
- monthly expenses;
- children’s expenses; and
- immediate financial difficulties.
This allows the court to understand why interim relief is being sought urgently.
What if the wife is employed?
Employment does not automatically prevent an application for interim maintenance.
The court may consider:
- wife’s net income;
- husband’s financial capacity;
- reasonable expenses;
- children’s requirements;
- assets and liabilities; and
- overall circumstances.
Therefore, an employed wife can still seek interim maintenance where the statutory requirements are otherwise satisfied.
What if the husband is a businessman?
Business income can make the interim assessment more complicated.
The wife should provide whatever reliable material she possesses regarding:
- nature of business;
- ownership;
- GST registration;
- business premises;
- previous income;
- company/directorship;
- rental income;
- property;
- lifestyle; and
- other financial resources.
The husband should likewise make complete financial disclosure.
The more transparent the financial record, the easier it is for the court to make a meaningful interim assessment.
What if the husband says that he owns property but receives no income from it?
Property ownership and income are related but not identical concepts.
A property may:
- generate rent;
- remain self-occupied;
- be vacant;
- be jointly owned;
- be subject to a loan; or
- have some other financial arrangement.
The Family Court can consider the overall financial circumstances rather than simply treating the market value of the property as monthly income.
Is the standard of living relevant at the interim stage?
Yes.
The financial requirements of the wife and children cannot always be assessed in isolation from the financial position and standard of living of the family.
However, the standard of living is only one factor.
Other factors include:
- actual income;
- earning capacity;
- reasonable needs;
- wife’s income;
- assets;
- liabilities;
- children’s expenses;
- medical needs; and
- other relevant circumstances.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does Section 144 BNSS guarantee interim maintenance within 60 days?
No. It says the application should, as far as possible, be disposed of within 60 days from service of notice.
Is the 60-day period counted from filing?
Not according to the wording of Section 144. The provision refers to 60 days from the date of service of notice of the interim-maintenance application.
Can interim maintenance be granted before the final maintenance case is decided?
Yes. Interim maintenance is specifically intended to operate during the pendency of the main proceeding.
Does the Family Court have to conduct a full trial before deciding interim maintenance?
Generally, no. Interim maintenance involves a prima facie assessment based on the available pleadings and financial material.
Can the husband delay the case by repeatedly asking for adjournments?
Repeated adjournments can cause delay, and the Supreme Court has specifically recognised this problem in maintenance litigation.
Can I request an early hearing because I have no income?
You can place genuine financial hardship and urgency before the Family Court and request appropriate directions.
What if my husband lives outside Indore?
If Family Court, Indore has territorial jurisdiction under Section 145 BNSS, his residence outside Indore does not by itself prevent the proceeding.
Can I get maintenance from the date of my application?
Section 144(2) permits maintenance or interim maintenance to be made payable from the date of the application if the court so orders.
Is there a fixed amount of interim maintenance?
No. The amount is determined according to the facts and financial circumstances of the case.
Does Rajnesh v. Neha require financial disclosure?
Yes. The Supreme Court directed disclosure of assets and liabilities in maintenance proceedings and prescribed a framework for such disclosure.
How long should the case take after financial affidavits are filed?
Rajnesh v. Neha directed the concerned Family Court/District Court/Magistrate’s Court to endeavour to decide the interim-maintenance application by a reasoned order within four to six months at the latest after the affidavits of disclosure have been filed, subject to the circumstances addressed in the judgment.
This should be understood as an expeditious-disposal direction, not as a promise that every case will necessarily conclude within that exact period.
Conclusion
For a wife seeking interim maintenance before Family Court, Indore, the most accurate answer to the question “How long will it take?” is:
Section 144 BNSS provides a statutory benchmark of 60 days from service of notice, as far as possible, but there is no absolute guarantee that an interim-maintenance order will be passed within exactly 60 days.
The actual timeline depends upon:
- prompt service of notice;
- appearance of the respondent;
- filing of replies;
- financial disclosures;
- production of documents;
- disputes regarding income;
- jurisdictional objections;
- number of adjournments;
- complexity of the financial circumstances; and
- the workload and procedural progress of the concerned court.
The Supreme Court in Rajnesh v. Neha recognised the serious problem of prolonged delay in interim-maintenance applications and directed courts to adopt a structured and expeditious approach. It also required financial disclosure by both parties and contemplated disposal within four to six months at the latest after the disclosure affidavits have been filed.
Therefore, a litigant should not treat 60 days as a guaranteed date on which money will start arriving. The better understanding is that the law expects the Family Court to deal with the interim application promptly, while the actual time will depend upon the circumstances and procedural progress of the particular case.
For a wife in Indore, the best way to minimise avoidable delay is to file a properly prepared interim-maintenance application, ensure prompt service, make complete financial disclosure, provide relevant documents, disclose other maintenance proceedings and avoid unnecessary procedural adjournments.
In maintenance litigation, a well-prepared financial record is often as important as the legal pleading itself.
Disclaimer: This information is intended for general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Please consult with a qualified lawyer for personalized advice specific to your situation.
Advocate J.S. Rohilla (Civil & Criminal Lawyer in Indore)
Contact: 88271 22304