XLM v XLN
Facts
The husband (XLM) and wife (XLN) married in India on 16 November 2016. Both are Indian nationals working in Singapore, he as a data scientist earning $10,000 a month and she as a data engineer earning $8,000 a month, and they have a young son. The wife filed for divorce in Singapore; the husband then filed in India and, on 30 December 2024, obtained a stay of the Singapore divorce on the ground that India was the more appropriate forum.
The wife then sought maintenance in Maintenance Summons No 1289 of 2024. A district judge refused to stay it. The husband appealed to the High Court (Family Division) in Registrar's Appeal from the Family Justice Courts No 12 of 2025. The district judge had considered it inconvenient for both parties to return to India for interim maintenance and found India not shown to be clearly the more appropriate forum.
Issues
- Whether a Singapore court should order interim maintenance when the divorce has been stayed in favour of proceedings in India.
- Whether there were strong reasons in the interests of justice to make an interim order here.
Holding
The court allowed the husband's appeal and ordered that the wife's application for maintenance be stayed.
Reasoning
With all three family members Indian nationals, a divorce in progress in India and the Singapore divorce stayed, the Indian court would decide the ancillary matters, including maintenance. A Singapore court should be slow to step into interim applications in that setting and should order interim maintenance only for strong reasons. Nothing stopped the wife applying in India, and a power of attorney given to her sister there would help.
Assessing maintenance also needed disclosure of both sides' assets. The husband said the wife came from a wealthy family with properties and passive income; that was unproven, but the assets were in India, where the court was better placed to order disclosure. The wife earned about as much as the husband, and there was no pressing need for an order here.
From the judgment
“It should only make an order for interim maintenance if there are strong reasons and is in the interests of justice to do so.”
[2025] SGHCF 53 at [7]
Outcome
Appeal allowed“The appeal is therefore allowed.”
Source: [2025] SGHCF 53, High Court (Family Division), decided 25 August 2025. Read directly from the judgment.
Key facts
| Court | High Court (Family Division) |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Choo Han Teck |
| Charges / claim | Family Law |
| Outcome | Appeal allowed |
| Counsel | Mahmood Gaznavi Chambers LLC, Rezza Gaznavi |
Source: [2025] SGHCF 53, High Court (Family Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Parties (2)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments on the same subject, most closely matched first.
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2025] SGHCF 53)