Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Amit Bansal partly allowed the appeal of Ashok Kumar, the woman's husband, against the trial court order and quashed the amount of Rs 60,000 a month which he was directed to pay.
"The court did not consider the woman's (Sonia) independent income and property and only decided the interim maintenance upon the alleged income of the husband," the judge said.
The ASJ, however, allowed Sonia to reside in her matrimonial house with her two sons "till finalisation of the case."
The sessions court said the trial court had not indicated as to how it had arrived at the figure of Rs 60,000 per month of interim maintenance payable by Ashok to his wife.
"In these circumstances, quantum of interim maintenance as fixed by the trial court is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the trial court for rehearing the arguments of both the parties regarding fixing of interim maintenance, if any," the court said.
In his appeal, Ashok had raised objections to the 2013 order of the trial court by which he was directed to pay Sonia an interim maintenance amount of Rs 60,000 per month.
He argued that in the matter of income, his wife was on an equal footing with him as she owns five properties and runs a beauty parlour besides receiving rental income.
He had prayed that the matter be remanded back to the trial court to re-assess the quantum of interim maintenance after hearing both the parties.
Sonia, through her counsel, had contended that she had to take care of her children and she was entitled to the same lifestyle she earlier enjoyed while staying with her husband.